Debsums returns same 'changed file' message

This question involves understanding why I’m asking this more than what I’m asking.

As a Win10 user I make it a point to run SFCs a LOT. It’s a terminal command that determines if your system is setup properly or not and fixes it if it can.

So I learned the equivalent in Linux is a debsums.

Now, presuming you Linux Pros agree that this is a good thing to do, I’ve done so, and whenever I run the -sa command I get this.


That is – every time I run it says it has changed those files.

Would you ignore this or find it concerning? Or is debsums inconclusive and pointless to run?

The procedure you are looking for would be better fulfilled by running fsck.
One method you could use would be to use fsck from the Recovery Mode menu.
Or by using APT or Synaptic for checking for broken packages or packages that can be reinstalled.

This is something you would use on an as-needed basis. Not for regular maintenance.
Debsums checks for modifications of a file, not really whether or not corruption has occurred. And config files are regularly modified- those can be ignored.

The answer to the ‘why’ you are asking more than the ‘what’:
It was useful on Windows, but not so much on Linux. The two operating systems currently work differently.
Windows uses a Registry to sort and organize installations since installations all operate under the assumption that dependencies must be filled by any individual installation. Not only does this increase bloat, but it can create conflict when a dependency file is different than a previously installed dependency file. Many of these are .dll files in MS Windows. In Linux, we use shared object or .so files.
Linux does the following differently:
It allocates the appropriate space on the drive for an installation, including expansion room for upgrading. Windows writes to the first available block, resulting in disk fragmentation.
Windows contrasts conflicting files. Linux defaults to the latest version.
On this Distro, dpkg verifies files during installation.

The lengthy list essentially boils down to: sfc/scannow is useful on Windows, but not really needed or useful on Linux.

If Canonicals Snap Packages do eventually take over… Then yes… I suspect at that time, Linux will need what you are used to using on Windows. :frowning:


Also if installing from a third party source (not from official channel or better, Synaptic Package Manager) you should inspect the file before installing:

1 Like

Thanks for replies ARAV and SWAR.