On Mon, May 03, 2004 at 01:40:47PM +0200, Andreas Tille wrote: > On Mon, 3 May 2004, Frank Lichtenheld wrote: > > > Can you explain in more detail in which maintainer scripts the scripts > > are called under which circumstances? > > > > Is this is only a problem with cdd-0.2? If yes, is it really necesarry to > > introduce a pre-depends just for the sake of smooth upgrades for unstable > > users? > Yes. I only noticed the problem on a machine I did not updated from cdd-common > 0.2 to 0.3 in my development process. If you have installed cdd-common 0.2 > on a machine the postinst script of the debian-med tools (version 0.6 which > depends on cdd-common 0.2) failed because the tools from cdd-common 0.2 > were just removed and tried the new postinst script which depended from a > config file in cdd-common 0.3 which was not yet installed. You have just described a scenario which requires a normal dependency. Not a pre-dependency. -- .''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield : :' : http://www.debian.org/ | `. `' | `- -><- |
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature