Re: services stopped but not restarted during apt-get dist-upgrade?
On Sun, Feb 03, 2002 at 07:58:44PM -0600, Adam Heath <doogie@debian.org> was heard to say:
> On Sun, 3 Feb 2002, Nikita V. Youshchenko wrote:
>
> > > AFAIKT, apt-get will set up all packages that were correctly set up
> > > until the bug. But you are right, it is messy. Sometimes I have to
> > > run apt-get to configure packages a bunch of times just because one
> > > package doesn't configure properly. Each run sets up just a few more
> > > packages so eventually I end up with only one or two broken ones that
> > > don't set
> > > up - the rest is fine...
> > >
> > > IMO, this would be a whishlist bug against dpkg. But then again, it
> > > is the fault of the faulty packages!
> >
> > Maybe, it will be better to fill a wishlist bug against apt, that apt-get
> > should not stop when dpkg call fails, but instead continue to process
> > packages that don't depend (in any way) on the one that caused the failure?
>
> Well, dpkg has the start of a 'daemon' mode(--command-fd, --status-fd). The
> apt author really wants something other than --status-fd, but that will have
> to wait until after woody.
>
> Once dpkg supports this, apt can be more sane in it's configure process.
> However, apt still can't safely use it, until the version of dpkg that gets
> released with a stable version of debian supports these features. And that
> will take years.
This may be a silly question, but why not just conditionalize on the
dpkg version within apt? (or the frontend)
Daniel
--
/----------------- Daniel Burrows <Daniel_Burrows@brown.edu> -----------------\
| Imagine if every Thursday your shoes exploded if you |
| tied them the usual way. This happens to us all the |
| time with computers, and nobody thinks of complaining. |
\----------------- The Turtle Moves! -- http://www.lspace.org ----------------/
Reply to: