On 2017-04-26 14:18, Andreas Beckmann wrote: > Package: libc-bin > Version: 2.19-18+deb8u7 > Severity: serious > User: debian...@lists.debian.org > Usertags: piuparts > > Hi, > > during a test with piuparts I noticed your package failed the piuparts > upgrade test because dpkg detected a conffile as being modified and then > prompted the user for an action. As there is no user input, this fails. > But this is not the real problem, the real problem is that this prompt > shows up in the first place, as there was nobody modifying this conffile > at all, the package has just been installed and upgraded... > > This is a violation of policy 10.7.3, see > https://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-files.html#s10.7.3, > which says "[These scripts handling conffiles] must not ask unnecessary > questions (particularly during upgrades), and must otherwise be good > citizens." > > https://wiki.debian.org/DpkgConffileHandling should help with figuring > out how to do this properly. > > In https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2009/08/msg00675.html and > followups it has been agreed that these bugs are to be filed with > severity serious. > > >From the attached log (scroll to the bottom...): > > Setting up libc-bin (2.19-18+deb8u7) ... > Installing new version of config file /etc/bindresvport.blacklist ... > Installing new version of config file /etc/gai.conf ... > > Configuration file `/etc/ld.so.conf' > ==> File on system created by you or by a script. > ==> File also in package provided by package maintainer. > What would you like to do about it ? Your options are: > Y or I : install the package maintainer's version > N or O : keep your currently-installed version > D : show the differences between the versions > Z : start a shell to examine the situation > The default action is to keep your current version. > *** ld.so.conf (Y/I/N/O/D/Z) [default=N] ? dpkg: error processing libc-bin > (--configure): > EOF on stdin at conffile prompt > Errors were encountered while processing: > libc-bin > > This was found on i386 with amd64-libs installed on the upgrade path > > squeeze -> wheezy -> jessie -> stretch > > while upgrading to jessie. > > In my piuparts scripts I have the following exception for cleaning > this up before purge, but that doesn't apply in this case, since it > is not yet purge time: > > # amd64-libs leaves a superfluous line there ... > sed -i '3{/^$/d}' /etc/ld.so.conf > > amd64-libs wasn't seen any more after squeeze :-) > > Maybe it is sufficient for libc-bin in jessie to > a) add Breaks: amd64-libs and > b) put the sed magic into the preinst
If the problem is due to amd64-libs, how can it be an RC bug in libc-bin? Sure we can try to do something, but I don't think the bug should be considered as RC on the libc side. Also this has been like that for 2 years, it has only been reported through piuparts. Not sure it warrants fixing with the risk of introducing new bugs. -- Aurelien Jarno GPG: 4096R/1DDD8C9B aurel...@aurel32.net http://www.aurel32.net
