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

Re: emacsen-common triggers rewrite



Hello,

On Tue 23 Jul 2024 at 08:18pm -05, Rob Browning wrote:

> Sean Whitton <spwhitton@spwhitton.name> writes:
>
>> We noticed that the triggers spec[0] says "It is not defined in what
>> order triggers will run."  We think this may invalidate your current
>> approach.  Or did you already see this and account for it?
>
> I'll have to refresh, but from what I recall offhand, that might be a
> problem.  (And perhaps I missed/forgot that from the spec.)
>
> And for what it's worth, when I left things last, I'd mostly been
> reasoning from Manoj's last graph here (and the subset covered in
> policy): https://people.debian.org/~srivasta/MaintainerScripts.html
>
> In any case, if I remember correctly, I was under the impression that
> they may respect dependency ordering at least to the extent that the
> postinst configure does, and hence allow us to avoid having to handle
> that ourselves (e.g. as we do now, not entirely satisfactorily, via
> tsort).  I believe I also did some testing in a VM, and the ordering was
> respected for some test packages I created, but of course that's not a
> promise.

Thanks.  When David and I talked about it, we thought that we shouldn't
rely on ordering that's not guaranteed by the triggers spec -- though
possibly the spec has fallen out-of-date with the implementation.

Anyway, it seems like some more thought is required for the
emacsen-common rewrite, so we are going to go ahead and move dh-elpa
experimental->unstable, and rebuild everything, to fix the bug that's
been affecting users upgrading between stable releases.

-- 
Sean Whitton

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: