Re: Help with fetchmail bug #268228
On Mon, Aug 30, 2004 at 05:35:01AM +0200, Adeodato Simó wrote:
> so the real problem is, as in the bug report, when the user purges the
> -common package (which will be in state 'removed') *after* the
> transition split packages ==> single packages has happened.
Yes, I neglected to mention this the first time. Thanks for pointing it
out.
I guess there are a few things to consider about all of the options
below. Does the solution fix the problem for users current without a
fetchmail user? Does the solution
> (a) re-introduce the fetchmail-common package as a dummy package,
> and make the fetchmail package (versioned) depend on it.
The problem that I see with this one is that the user would then have to
have the fetchmail-common package installed. Which is not so terrible,
since that is how the situation is for woody.
> (b) re-introduce the fetchmail-common package, make the fetchmail
> package conflict with fetchmail-common << 6.2.5 or so and put in the
> f-common description somethink like: "Dummy package to help
> transition from woody. You may safely purge this package once it has
> been installed."
This seems like the most reasonable of all solutions. Once we release
etch with the fetchmail-common package, I can remove it from the package
in sid. The only problem would be that upgrades from woody to etch could
have the same issue; I don't see that as a problem, since I don't think
we support upgrades that skip a distribution.
> all have their pros and cons, and perhaps the original init.d one,
> being uglier, is more robust that these ones.
What other cons do you see with option B?
--
gram
Reply to: