Code review comment for ~ahasenack/ubuntu/+source/base-files:xenial-handle-was-removed-1895302

I mentioned in the sru template that no attempts are made to fix the case
where someone already has the wasremoved file and just installs the updated
base-files. The wasremoved file is only removed in motd-news-config, and I
don't know how to detect correctly the case to safely remove it in
base-files.

On Thu, Sep 17, 2020, 19:31 Bryce Harrington <email address hidden>
wrote:

> I've run the test case described in the SRU bug in a xenial LXC container
> without ubuntu-server installed, and verified without the PPA package it
> creates the wasremoved file, but if upgrading instead to the PPA version of
> the package, no wasremoved file was created if there was not one there
> already.
>
> I noticed though that if the wasremoved file was already present,
> upgrading to the PPA does not remove it. I'm not sure whether that's
> intentional, but I removed everything and re-ran the test cases (upgrading
> from xenial's base-file, to xenial-updates, then to the PPA) and verified
> this is indeed the behavior. The last sub-bullet in the changelog suggests
> the file should not be present at all; if this is expected perhaps that
> needs clarification?
>
> I also ran all the same testing in parallel on bionic and focal, and saw
> identical behaviors.
>
>
> --
>
> https://code.launchpad.net/~ahasenack/ubuntu/+source/base-files/+git/base-files/+merge/390865
> You are the owner of
> ~ahasenack/ubuntu/+source/base-files:xenial-handle-was-removed-1895302.
>
> Launchpad-Message-Rationale: Owner
> Launchpad-Message-For: ahasenack
> Launchpad-Notification-Type: code-review
> Launchpad-Branch:
> ~ahasenack/ubuntu/+source/base-files/+git/base-files:xenial-handle-was-removed-1895302
>