Re: postinst scripts failing because a new conffile wasn't accepted: Is it a bug?
On 11/1/05, Frank Lichtenheld <djpig@debian.org> wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 31, 2005 at 06:56:44PM +0100, Frank Küster wrote:
> > In my opinion this is not a bug (except if the package is crucial for
> > the system to work and be reachable, like ssh) - the local admin simply
> > has to review the changes to conffiles that dpkg requested, and have a
> > look at NEWS.Debian and changelog.Debian. If these files do not contain
> > enough information to fix the system, then this is a bug, right? But
> > the simple fact that a postinst script fails because a change has been
> > refused isn't - and for sure it is not a serious or grave bug,
> > severities often used when a postinst fails.
> >
> > Opinions?
>
> There is one big problem with that scenario that I haven't seen
> mentioned in this thread yet: If I make the dist-upgrade of a machine
> from sarge to etch and the dist-upgrade fails right in the middle
> of the installed 3000 packages I will be severly disappointed to
> say the least if that didn't happen for a very good reason...
> That's a fact that often gets lost when discussing such problem from
> developer to developer that install sid on their machines and update
> about 30 packages at once.
>
> So if it is at all possible to avoid failing the postinst (which of
> course also means to not break other packages installation as you
> have pointed out) it should be done.
Wouldn't it be better to improve apt so it doesn't abort if a single
package fails?
It should still be able to continue with independent packages.
Reply to: