16.04: Graphical login/desktop vanished? (coming closer)

Ralf Mardorf silver.bullet at zoho.com
Tue Jul 26 21:06:01 UTC 2016


On Tue, 26 Jul 2016 19:21:29 +0200, Oliver Grawert wrote:
>hi,
>Am Dienstag, 26. Juli 2016 19:05:29 CEST schrieb Ralf Mardorf 
><silver.bullet at zoho.com>:
>> On Tue, 26 Jul 2016 16:03:54 +0200, Oliver Grawert wrote:  
>>>i assume the package removal did simply not remove the sysvinit file
>>>(being probably considered a conffile by debhelper and purge was not
>>>used (yay aptitude ...) so it was left in place) and at a reboot the
>>>generator identified there was no systemd unit for it and simply
>>>generated one.  
>> 
>> Apart from an user error, a plausible reasoning. Assumed a
>> "config" should not be removed, doesn't it require that this config
>> wasn't edited? OTOH assumed a package isn't available by the
>> repositories or the local cache anymore, there might be no way to
>> check if a file was modified.  
>
>from https://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-opersys.html section
>9.3.2
>
>"The /etc/init.d scripts must be treated as configuration files,
>either (if they are present in the package, that is, in the .deb file)
>by marking them as conffiles, or,...."
>"...Only when dpkg is executed with the --purge option will
>configuration files be removed. In particular, as
>the /etc/init.d/package script itself is usually a conffile, it will
>remain on the system if the package is removed but not purged. "
>
>so the behaviour is expected ... that the generator kicks in in this
>case smells like a bug though, it might need to check if the related
>package actually exists on the system...

That's indeed rational, but tricky. What's inside of init.d is
nebulous. One one side it quasi could be a "config" to manage a service,
on the other side it quasi could be the "program" itself.




More information about the ubuntu-users mailing list