Re: Pre-Depends according to sarge_rc_policy.txt
[quotation from sarge_rc_policy.txt:]
> > Packages listed in "Pre-Depends:" must be (adequately) functional
> > when unpacked but not installed.
[quotation from policy:]
> > When a package declaring a pre-dependency is about to be
> > _unpacked_ the pre-dependency can be satisfied if the depended-on
> > package is either fully configured, _or even if_ the depended-on
> > package(s) are only unpacked or half-configured, provided that
> > they have been configured correctly at some point in the past
> > (and not removed or partially removed since). In this case, both
> > the previously-configured and currently unpacked or
> > half-configured versions must satisfy any version clause in the
> > `Pre-Depends' field.
On Sat, 2003-09-06 at 14:06, Santiago Vila wrote in debian-devel:
> Does the word "adequately" not summarizes pretty much the "long version"
> in policy?
The sarge_rc_policy text doesn't summarize the policy text. Policy
doesn't impose any special requirements on a pre-depended-on
package; policy imposes a requirement on dpkg, telling it that it
may only install the pre-depending package if the pre-depended-on
package has already been unpacked and configured. (The point of
this requirement is to provide a mechanism whereby a package can
require another package to be configured before the first's preinst
and unpack happens.) The sarge_rc_policy text does impose a special
requirement on a pre-depended-on package: it says that the
pre-depended-on package must be functional even when not configured.
AJT has written the following in explanation of the sarge_rc_policy
text:
> Apt (generally) guarantees pre-dep'ed packages are configured before
> unpacking, but dpkg doesn't. Consider (if you were around in those
> days) the Unpack/Configure/Configure/Configure/Configure cycles we
> used to go through with dpkg. But we don't require Debian users to
> use apt.
So it seems that the sarge_rc_policy requirement is additional to
policy and is intended to deal with a shortcoming in dpkg. Please
correct me if I am wrong.
--
Thomas Hood
Reply to: