Re: slink -> potato
On Mon, Oct 04, 1999 at 08:15:54AM +1000, Herbert Xu wrote:
> > > I think the worst case would be a telnetd linked with a broken
> > > shlib (or in the case of telnetd, perhaps a missing or broken
> > > /usr/lib/telnetd/login) that gives a security hole. If you wish
> > > to minimise downtime, the proper way to do it IMHO is to have
> > > certain packages flagged as daemons, and they should be upgraded
> > > (by whatever program that is in charge) one by one.
On Sun, Oct 03, 1999 at 07:06:10PM -0400, Raul Miller wrote:
> > Under what circumstances would this be in effect during an upgrade
> > but not otherwise?
On Mon, Oct 04, 1999 at 09:57:35AM +1000, Herbert Xu wrote:
> The fact that dpkg does not deconfigure a package which depends on
> another deconfigured package is a bug in dpkg. This should not be used
> as an excuse to not deal with things correctly in maintainer scripts.
Ok, if dpkg didn't have this "bug", how would this bug be triggered?