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

Re: dash Debian package - RC bugs

Raphael Geissert <geissert@debian.org> writes:

> That's still the plan. The problem is that once dash is the only package
> shipping /bin/sh, bash would be the one prompting the user whether
> she/he wants to use bash (so that the diversion is added) it would still
> break in case the user already added a local diversion.

> So this is a problem between dpkg-divert and debconf. Based on the
> discussion from the bug report (#575361), it appears that there's a
> compelling reason not to remove a local diversion no matter what the
> user answers to the debconf prompt.

Right, my concern here is that normally we treat it as an invariant that
no Debian package should ever mess with a local diversion, since local
diversions are intended to be sysadmin overrides of whatever the Debian
package is doing.  However, in this particular case, we just prompted the
user for whether they wanted to do something, so I can also see the logic
behind why a local diversion would be removed.

I'm not sure which principle is the most compelling here: whether we
should stick with packages never messing with local diversions and hence
bailing entirely on switching shells if a local diversion is present, or
whether it makes sense for the package to remove a local diversion in this

Russ Allbery (rra@debian.org)               <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>

Reply to: