Hi Matthijs, Thanks for your comments. On 2012/02/08 11:00AM, Matthijs Kooijman wrote: >Hi Gianluca, > >I stumbled upon your patch trying to accomplish the same thing in my own >package (but I guess I'll just postpone my changes until >dpkg-maintscript-helper can take care of all the details for me) and >have some minor comments on the patch. I can't comment on the actual >working of the patch, though ;-) > >> + local LAST_VERSION="$2" >Shouldn't that one really be called FIRSTVERSION, since it's the first >version that contains the link (as opposed to the last version to not >contain the link)? > Actually it's (if my memory doesn't fails me) the last version having a directory instead of a symlink, plus it's in conformance with the rest of the script. If I remember right, Raphael asked me to change the name into the current one to be coherent with the script. >> + # In the case statement, $1 is the name of the maint script, $2 the >> + # package version >This comment seems untrue to me, $1 and $2 are the arguments passed to >the maintainer script (action and version, usually)? At least the "name >of the maint script" is $DPKG_MAINTSCRIPT_NAME, right? I think you're right, what I meant was "$1 is the maintscript _command_". $2 is still the package version IMHO, if you consider all the parameter shifting done before. > >> + error "the package has no exclusive ownership of the directory; "\ >> + "please check permissions" >This error message is confusing: It suggests that there is a problem >with the filesystem permissions, while you are really checking the >"owning packages" for the directory. > Yeah, this is kind of a tough point I'm working on, so please don't take the comment as correct --- I'll keep it in line with what I do eventually! All the best, -- Gianluca Ciccarelli http://disi.unitn.it/~ciccarelli GPG key ID: FDF429B0
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature