Bug#157988: passivetex 1.18-0.1 fails in postinst
On Fri, Aug 23, 2002 at 03:40:27PM -0700, C.M. Connelly wrote:
> Your /etc/texmf/language.dat file doesn't match mine. In fact, I
> don't think *any* of your language.dat files match the ones I have
> on my system.
>
> My /etc/texmf/language.dat, which is the same as
> /usr/share/texmf/tex/generic/config/language.dat (on my system,
> the latter is a symlink to the former) has a line for French that
> doesn't include the frhyphex reference. The only ``*language*''
> file I can find on my system that *does* reference frhyphex.tex is
> the language.dat for platex, which is in
> /usr/share/texmf/tex/platex/config/language.dat on my system.
/usr/share/texmf/tex/platex/config/language.dat on my system is unmodified
according to the package-shipped md5sum, and it does reference frhyphex.tex.
> Are you sure that passivetex (I'm not familiar with this package)
> isn't overwriting configuration files in tetex-base?
The package looks clean.
> Could you
> have copied the platex language.dat file over
> /etc/texmf/language.dat at some point?
At least I can't remember doing that. The two files have a similar
structure, but the content is different - it may well be a very old version
of the platex file.
Checking using diff, the ~ file was the one causing the problem, and it is
more than 3 years old !
# diff /etc/texmf/language.dat~ /etc/texmf/language.dat
32c32
< french frhyph.tex frhyphex.tex
---
> french frhyph.tex %frhyphex.tex
# ll /etc/texmf/language.dat~ /etc/texmf/language.dat
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 2501 Aug 23 23:37 /etc/texmf/language.dat
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 2500 Apr 22 1999 /etc/texmf/language.dat~
#
> Do you have a /etc/texmf/language.dat.dpkg-dist file that doesn't
> contain the frhyphex.tex reference?
For some reason no. Indeed it appears tetex-base does not ship md5sum for
this file, although the file is registered everywhere else - maybe you run
dh_md5sums too early during the build ?
# grep language.dat /var/lib/dpkg/info/tetex-base.conffiles
/etc/texmf/language.dat
# grep texmf/language.dat
/var/lib/dpkg/info/tetex-base.md5sums
# grep texmf/language.dat /var/lib/dpkg/info/tetex-base.list
/etc/texmf/language.dat
Anyway that doesn't seem to explain why dpkg did not notice the conffile has
is different from the one shipped - or maybe it did, my tetex-base upgrade
was done in May, but then there should be a .dpkg-dist here :(
# ls -l /etc/texmf/language.dat*
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 2501 Aug 23 23:37 /etc/texmf/language.dat
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 2794 Nov 25 2001 /etc/texmf/language.dat.dpkg-old
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 1866 Sep 27 1997 /etc/texmf/language.dat.dpkg-veryold
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 2386 Nov 2 1998 /etc/texmf/language.dat.tetex.dpkg-new
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 2500 Apr 22 1999 /etc/texmf/language.dat~
Regards,
--
Yann Dirson <ydirson@altern.org> | Why make M$-Bill richer & richer ?
Debian-related: <dirson@debian.org> | Support Debian GNU/Linux:
Pro: <yann.dirson@fr.alcove.com> | Freedom, Power, Stability, Gratuity
http://ydirson.free.fr/ | Check <http://www.debian.org/>
Reply to: