Re: The util-linux reorganisation

[Wichert Akkerman <wichert@cistron.nl>]

Previously Adrian Bunk wrote:
> - merge mount and bsdutils in util-linux
>   All three packages are essential and I don't see a reason why they
>   should be in separate binary packages.
>   I think I need for the transition empty packages of mount and bsdutils
>   (because they are currently essential).

You don't need transition packges, look into the package-disappearing
trick from dpkg.

>   I've seen recently a package
>   that removed itself in the postinst. Can someone give ma a pointer which
>   package that was?

I package can't remove itself in its postinst, and one does that would be
a grave bug.

Wichert.

-- 
   ________________________________________________________________
 / Generally uninteresting signature - ignore at your convenience  \
| wichert@cistron.nl                  http://www.liacs.nl/~wichert/ |
| 1024D/2FA3BC2D 576E 100B 518D 2F16 36B0  2805 3CB8 9250 2FA3 BC2D |