On Thu, Aug 01, 2024 at 14:47:16 +0200, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
> No, even for unstable, maintainers should ensure that packages are
> upgraded in the right order.
Once again, here is my understanding of the current situation:
1) A new procps package was uploaded, which no longer has /etc/sysctl.conf.
2) A new systemd package was uploaded, which removes the now-dangling
/etc/sysctl.d/99-whatever symlink.
3) It was discovered that the new procps package fails to remove the
existing /etc/sysctl.conf file when upgrading. This was filed as
a bug, and will be fixed at some point.
I see NO reason to point fingers of blame at systemd (cf. Subject:).
I see nothing amiss here in the order in which packages were uploaded.
I see NO reason that these two packages have to be upgraded in a specific
order (cf. quoted text). Once the procps bug is fixed, upgrading EITHER
of the two packages will cause the /etc/sysctl.conf to stop being used.
It doesn't MATTER which one is upgraded first.
What exactly is your problem right now? What part of this quite natural
unstable change process has you SO ENRAGED that you keep posting over
and over to this thread? I really can't see it.
Are you angry because your system still has a file that it's not supposed
to have, even though nothing reads that file any longer?
Please get over it. If having an unused file present INFURIATES you,
just remove the stupid file already.
