Re: [RFC] Skipping new-prerm failed-upgrade?
Hi,
On Sat, 18 Jun 2011, Jonathan Nieder wrote:
> Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> > 1/ I'd argue that in the case of downgrade, dpkg should not try to run
> > the failed-upgrade fallback because there's no way the oldest version
> > can be aware of how to work-around a problem in a prerm script of a
> > newer version that did not exist at the time the oldest prerm was
> > written.
> >
> > Suggested patch attached. Do you agree with this? Do you see possible
> > problems with this?
>
> The patch doesn't seem to be attached, but that makes perfect sense to
> me. If the new prerm is failing for no good reason, a person can upgrade
> to a version with the bug fixed and then downgrade.
Oops, sorry, it's here:
http://anonscm.debian.org/gitweb/?p=users/hertzog/dpkg.git;a=commitdiff;h=4bf0cb997ee46563fae8d43424c8bd6fe6cd21cb
>
> > 2/ It would be nice to have a way for the prerm script to explicitly
> > disable the fallback. Maybe we could define a special exit code that
> > the "prerm upgrade" can use to tell dpkg to not consider the fallback.
>
> That would defeat the point of having a fallback (namely avoiding bugs
> putting systems into a state with no automatic way in the packaging
> system to get out of it), so I think it's an awful idea. ;-) If you
> can't trust the maintainers of future versions of your package, who
> can you trust?
Yeah, good point. And for upgrade it's the preinst that matters more, i.e.
for example when udev doesn't want to be upgraded because the kernel is
too old. And there there's no similar problem of fallback.
Cheers,
--
Raphaël Hertzog ◈ Debian Developer
Follow my Debian News ▶ http://RaphaelHertzog.com (English)
▶ http://RaphaelHertzog.fr (Français)
Reply to: