[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: /etc/shells management

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

Reply to: