On Sun, Sep 07, 2003 at 09:42:40PM +0200, Josip Rodin wrote: > On Sun, Sep 07, 2003 at 10:23:15AM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote: > > Where did you come by this, and if it's something we should worry about, > > why isn't it documented in Policy? > > It is, but you shouldn't worry about it anyhow because nobody's crazy enough > to try doing anything with a dpkg that old and current packages. It would > likely fail in way much more spectacular than this, and we caution against > it in the Release Notes. Do you think it would be a good idea to drop that clause from section 6.6 of Policy? I mean, in theory, Policy is supposed to document current practice, and until Manoj posted his snippet I'd never seen a Debian postinst script or portion there of that bothered to see if $2 could be '<unknown>'. -- G. Branden Robinson | The National Security Agency is Debian GNU/Linux | working on the Fourth Amendment branden@debian.org | thing. http://people.debian.org/~branden/ | -- Phil Lago, Deputy XD, CIA
Attachment:
pgpAZbarpbg0s.pgp
Description: PGP signature