Re: ELF conversion

[Ian Jackson <ian@chiark.chu.cam.ac.uk>]

David Engel writes ("Re: ELF conversion"):
> > > OK, but why even let the installation get to the preinst script?  How
> > > about we add a new dependency field in the control files which tells
> > > dpkg that the specified packages/versions must already be completely
> > > installed (unpacked *and* configured) before installing the new
> > > package?  This seems *much* cleaner to me and won't clutter up some
> > > directory with a bunch of xyz-available links to /bin/true.
> > 
> > But these fields would only be used by the base packages, and the base
> > packages depend on practically nothing except the libc (and sometimes
> > each other).
> > 
> > If I provide and document such a field all sorts of other packages
> > will start to use it, which will break people's attempts to do
> > bulk-upgrade.
> 
> So.  Why would we treat these misuses differently than any other bugs?

You're right.  OK, on the ever-growing wishlist it goes.  (FYI, the
wishlist for dpkg is reproduced below.)

Of course, packages will have to make sure that dpkg supports the new
field (older dpkg's will just ignore unknown fields).  I'll think
about how to do this.

Ian.