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

Re: Building debs: Interesting inter-dependency conundrum.

On Wed, 2004-03-10 at 07:59, Wichert Akkerman wrote:
> Previously Brian J. Murrell wrote:
> > This much I know:  I need to set "Depends: bee" in "eh"'s control file
> > to have the brand new "bee" package installed during the upgrade of
> > "eh".
> Right.
> > But the twist is that "eh" needs to be configured (I don't care what
> > order they are unpacked in) prior to "bee" because "eh"('s postinst)
> > does work that needs to be done before "bee"'s configuration/postinst
> > can be done.
> Ugh. The only way I can think of to enforce that is to have bee
> Pre-Depend on eh, but I'm not quite sure it that will work as well since
> it isn't a standard dependency cycle which dpkg will break.

OK.  Not having tried your Pre-Depends solution yet, would moving the
operation that needs to be done in "eh"s postinst prior "bee"s postinst
into "eh"s preinst be a better solution?  Would that ensure that the
operation will be done before "bee"s postinst?

So to summarize, if I have "eh" depend on "bee" and have "eh-op" in
"eh"s preinst and "bee-op" in "bee"'s postinst, doing a --dist-upgrade
will upgrade "eh", pull in "bee" and ensure that "eh-op" will run before
"bee-op".  Am I correct?  Is this a vaild option?


My other computer is your Microsoft Windows server.

Brian J. Murrell

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

Reply to: