Your message dated Sat, 17 Aug 2019 21:43:42 +0200
with message-id <20190817194342.ga17...@aurel32.net>
and subject line Re: Bug#861238: libc-bin: prompting due to modified conffiles
which were not modified by the user: /etc/ld.so.conf
has caused the Debian Bug report #861238,
regarding libc-bin: prompting due to modified conffiles which were not modified
by the user: /etc/ld.so.conf
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.
(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact ow...@bugs.debian.org
immediately.)
--
861238: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=861238
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
--- Begin Message ---
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
cheers,
Andreas
amd64-libs_None.log.gz
Description: application/gzip
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
On 2017-04-27 09:46, Aurelien Jarno wrote:
> 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.
Given squeeze and wheezy are not supported anymore, I assume people have
already upgraded to jessie and fixed this *amd64-libs* issue. There is
no point in fixing that anymore. I am therefore closing the bug.
--
Aurelien Jarno GPG: 4096R/1DDD8C9B
aurel...@aurel32.net http://www.aurel32.net
--- End Message ---
