Re: Package maintainer script policy.
Raul Miller <email@example.com> writes:
> Guy Maor <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> > Have you guys nothing better to do with your time?
> Yep, otherwise I would have looked that up.
What you said doesn't make any sense, but that's not important. What
I meant is that surely there's some policy you can work on instead of
this semantic hair-splitting over whether it's ok for a package to
have an executable as a maintainer "script".
> Also, if /bin/sh has stopped working (or, more generally, if libc
> has stopped working) the installation run would typically die long
> before this libreadlineg2.postinst script would be run.
No, Raul, that's the whole point. When you're upgrading libc5->libc6,
/bin/sh really does stop working until this postinst runs.
It's a C program because that makes it more robust. There is a very
small set of programs which will render your system unusable if they
stop working. The C library and ld.so are already on that list so
there's no point in making this postinst statically linked. Perl is
not on that list so there is a point in not writing it in perl.
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to email@example.com
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact firstname.lastname@example.org