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

Re: Should ucf be of priority required?

On Sat, Dec 05 2009, brian m. carlson wrote:

> On Sat, Dec 05, 2009 at 04:47:18PM +0100, Patrick Schoenfeld wrote:
>> That is okay, as long as ucf is around. But as soon as it isn't
>> the purge of a package is succesful while leaving modified files around.
>> So the effect is that a purge does not "remove everything".
>> Do we really want that? Should ucf be 'required' to avoid that?
> ucf being priority required is not sufficient.  It is still possible to
> remove such a package (mawk is a good example) and therefore you would
> still need to execute ucf conditionally.  The only way around that is to
> make ucf essential, and I don't think that's a good idea.

        Making a package essential in order to avoid a if clause in
 postinsts is very likely too frivolous a reason to pass muster, yes.

The Constitution may not be perfect, but it's a lot better than what
we've got!
Manoj Srivastava <srivasta@debian.org> <http://www.debian.org/~srivasta/>  
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B  924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C

Reply to: