[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Bug#336714: tetex-base: asked about upgrade of previously non-existent conffile /etc/texdoctk/texdocrc



Hamish Moffatt <hamish@debian.org> wrote:

> On Thu, Nov 03, 2005 at 04:02:52PM +0100, Frank Küster wrote:
>> 
>> - This system was a woody system somewhen (or testing/unstable with
>>   packages as later released with woody), with the texdocrc file
>>   belonging to the texdoctk package
> [snip]
>
> It was never a woody system exactly. It was installed with testing or
> unstable in January 2005, before sarge's release.

And you never upgraded to one of the teTeX-2.9/3.0 versions in
experimental?

>> - You upgraded to sarge (or at least sarge's package population),
>>   tetex-{base,bin} replaced texdoctk (leaving it in state rc), and took
>>   over its files.  However, we took over texdocrc with ucf, and
>>   therefore dpkg doesn't know that it now belongs to tetex-base
>> 
>> - You purged texdoctk (maybe in an effort to purge many rc packages you
>>   didn't care about), and dpkg removed the file
>> 
>> - You upgraded tetex-base which produced the problem you reported.
>> 
>> If this is right, the reason for the bug is "tetex-base didn't take over
>> files properly".  Does that sound reasonable?
>
> Yes, if the date of texdoctk's removal lines up.

No, it doesn't - if you installed testing or unstable in 2005 (or even
in 2004), texdoctk was already gone by then, and dpkg wouldn't know any
owner of the texdocrc file.  I have no clue what is going on.

Regards, Frank
-- 
Frank Küster
Inst. f. Biochemie der Univ. Zürich
Debian Developer




Reply to: