Comment 6 for bug 1047561

3 releases ( Raring Ringtail, Saucy Salamander, Trusty Tahr) after this bug was reported for Quantal Quetzal , the installation of the slpd package is still broken .

PRETTY_NAME="Ubuntu 14.04 LTS"
VERSION="14.04, Trusty Tahr"

Tue Jun 3 17:00:22 BST 2014

[17:00] puma:{init.d/}# dpkg --purge slpd
(Reading database ... 497107 files and directories currently installed.)
Removing slpd (1.2.1-9) ...
Stopping OpenSLP server: slpd.
Purging configuration files for slpd (1.2.1-9) ...
Processing triggers for man-db (2.6.7.1-1) ...

[17:00] puma:{init.d/}# apt-get install slpd
Reading package lists... Done
Building dependency tree
Reading state information... Done
The following NEW packages will be installed:
  slpd
0 upgraded, 1 newly installed, 0 to remove and 24 not upgraded.
Need to get 0 B/67.8 kB of archives.
After this operation, 187 kB of additional disk space will be used.
Selecting previously unselected package slpd.
(Reading database ... 497095 files and directories currently installed.)
Preparing to unpack .../slpd_1.2.1-9_amd64.deb ...
Unpacking slpd (1.2.1-9) ...
Processing triggers for ureadahead (0.100.0-16) ...
Processing triggers for man-db (2.6.7.1-1) ...
Setting up slpd (1.2.1-9) ...
+ [ configure = configure ]
+ dpkg --compare-versions le 1.2.1-7.6
+ echo Reinstalling init script for new priorities ...
Reinstalling init script for new priorities ...
+ update-rc.d slpd remove
update-rc.d: /etc/init.d/slpd exists during rc.d purge (use -f to force)
dpkg: error processing package slpd (--configure):
 subprocess installed post-installation script returned error exit status 1
Processing triggers for ureadahead (0.100.0-16) ...
Errors were encountered while processing:
 slpd
E: Sub-process /usr/bin/dpkg returned an error code (1)

The error is in the package post-installation script

/var/lib/dpkg/info.slpd.postinst

line 9: update-rc.d slpd remove

All that is needed is the addtion of "-f" as in

update-rc.d -f slpd remove

Is the addition of a "-f" too arduous for the maintainer of this package to do in nearly 18 months since this bug was first reported?