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

Re: boot floppies status



Guy Maor writes ("Re: boot floppies status"):
> On Tue, 19 Mar 1996, David Engel wrote:
> > > So just to confirm, it is not necessary for base packages to call 
> > > dpkg --assert-support-predepends and i386elf-in-kernel in their preinst
> > > because libc5 and/or ld.so will do it.  Correct?
> > 
> > Not quite.  They do not need to call 'i386elf-...'.  They still need
> > to call 'dpkg --assert...' and also include a pre-depends for libc5
> > (>=5.2.18-2).  Especially note the -2 revision since that will be the
> > one with the appropriate pre-depends for ld.so.
> 
> Is this still correct?  Since libc5 and/or ld.so make the 'dpkg --assert..'
> call, and the base package predepends on them, why should the base
> package also need to make the call?

Think about it: if the base package doesn't say dpkg
--assert-support-predepends, what is to stop it being installed with
unsatisfied predependencies using a version of dpkg that doesn't know
about predependencies ?

> The user could downgrade dpkg, I suppose, but he could also remove elf
> support from his kernel.  So really we should put neither or both
> checks in every base package.  It doesn't make sense to put only one.

No, David's scheme is the right one IMO.

Ian.



Reply to: