Bug#37254: dpkg: update-alternatives madness
> I agree that update-alternatives shouldn't put an alternative into
> manual mode because a _target_ disappeared unexpectedly. I'll look
> into this eventually.
> But, the problem doesn't happen if you call update-alternatives in the
> prerm, which is where you should. So it would be good if the policy
> manual could be changed to this effect.
> Therefore, I've reassigned this bug to "debian-policy, dpkg". When
> the policy is changed, please assign it back to dpkg.
Now the packaging manual already states:
Each package provides its own version under its own name, and
calls update-alternatives in its postinst to register its version
(and again in its prerm to deregister it).
Do we need to then specify this in the policy manual, or will it be
sufficient to file bugs against packages which don't have the needed
update-alternatives in their prerm?
Julian Gilbey, Dept of Maths, QMW, Univ. of London. J.D.Gilbey@qmw.ac.uk
Debian GNU/Linux Developer, see http://www.debian.org/~jdg