Re: (fwd) Draft spec for new dpkg "triggers" feature
Ian Jackson <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> Frank Küster writes ("Re: (fwd) Draft spec for new dpkg "triggers" feature"):
>> Ian Jackson <email@example.com> wrote:
>> > I have answered your `use case' already: you should see which file is
>> > causing the breakage, and who installed that file. The triggers
>> > mechanism is _not suitable_ because the information about `which
>> > package caused the trigger' is _wrong_ for this use case !
>> *I* do see it, *if* I manage to get updmap.log. The user sees it easier
>> if it is displayed by dpkg, and he'll more probably tell me this, by
>> just pasting dpkg's output in the bug report.
> So have your machinery squirt updmap.log to stderr at the appropriate
> point and voila! it will appear in front of the user for their
> delectation and delight.
Yes, and they usually will report
"It spit out lots of errors, the last (hopefully relevant) lines being
updmap: This is fatal, exiting
dpkg: texlive-base-bin trigger '/etc/texmf/updmap.d' failed
dpkg: texlive-base-bin failed to configure
What's wrong with your damn packages?"
Maybe you could convince me if you explain me why it is so difficult or
problematic to implement a dpkg message which packages required a
>> I also don't see how the information would be wrong. dpkg would say:
>> dpkg: trigger "foo" owned by package "bar" failed. This trigger has
>> been requested by the packages "baz-a, baz-b, baz-c".
>> It wouldn't claim that any of baz-* are responsible for the breakage, it
>> just gives a hint "try these if you want to reproduce the bug".
> As explained previously, the packages that would be listed might be
> unrelated to the one that was the cause.
But the first time it fails, the relevant package will be among the
list, won't it?
Dr. Frank Küster
Single Molecule Spectroscopy, Protein Folding @ Inst. f. Biochemie, Univ. Zürich
Debian Developer (teTeX/TeXLive)