Re: Should ucf be of priority required?
On Sun, Dec 06 2009, Norbert Preining wrote:
> On So, 06 Dez 2009, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
>> So, policy does not require dependencies to be around at least
>> during purge.
>
> Ah yes of course, sorry. I was referring to the remove phase, where it
> is also not present, although policy states it.
Are you sure this is the case being discussed? The thread is
dealing with ucf -p, which is called when you are purging your package.
,----[ Manual page ucf(1) ]
| -p, --purge
| Removes all vestiges of the file from the state hashfile. This is
| required to allow a package to be reinstalled after it is purged;
| since otherwise, the real configuration file is removed, but it
| remains in the hash file; and on reinstall no action is taken,
| since the md5sum of the new file matches that in the hashfile.
| In short, remember to use this option in the postrm for every
| configuration file managed by ucf when the package is being
| purged (assuming ucf itself exists). Note: ucf does not actually
| touch the file on disk in this operation, so any file removals
| are still the responsibility of the calling package.
`----
So, I see no indication that dpkg is not following policy, based
on this thread. What makes you think it is?
manoj
--
We are using Linux daily to UP our productivity - so UP yours! (Adapted
from Pat Paulsen by Joe Sloan)
Manoj Srivastava <srivasta@debian.org> <http://www.debian.org/~srivasta/>
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B 924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C
Reply to: