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

Bug#1104178: dh-elpa: upgrade fails: cannot overwrite non-directory ... with directory



Control: retitle -1 dh-elpa: upgrade fails: cannot overwrite non-directory ... with directory

Xiyue Deng <manphiz@gmail.com> writes:

> Hi Sean,
>
> Sean Whitton <spwhitton@spwhitton.name> writes:
>
>> Hello,
>>
>> On Sun 27 Apr 2025 at 03:25am -07, Xiyue Deng wrote:
>>
>>> Interestingly, I cannot reproduce this with "apt dist-upgrade" which is
>>> why I didn't notice this issue earlier.  On inspecting the install log,
>>> it looks like with "dist-upgrade", it will upgrade the emacs
>>> installation before addons which will first uninstall all addons and
>>> re-install them after emacs is configured, and hence worked around this
>>> potential issue.
>>>
>>> Still, I think it's better to have this fixed so that it works in all
>>> cases.  I have tested a fix in the "bug#1104178" branch to be working.
>>> The diff can be seen here[1].  Please review.
>>
>> It's an RC bug regardless; we always support partial upgrades, and
>> therefore can't rely on package upgrade order like that.
>>
>> Given the freeze and dh-elpa's status as a toolchain package, we need to
>> handle this very carefully.
>>
>> I think we need David's review on the basic approach taken by the patch
>> before proceeding much further, but I can comment on the shell
>> scripting:
>>
>> - TIL unlink(1).  Let's just use rm(1).
>>
>> - Quote the output of readlink, i.e. "$(readlink "${SYMLINK}")".
>>   Quotation resets inside $().
>>
>> - "for file in ./*" not "for file in *"
>>   per https://dwheeler.com/essays/filenames-in-shell.html sec. 1.2
>>
>
> Thanks for the review.  All suggestions implemented and the updated
> version has been pushed to the branch.  Also retested to be working.
> Let's wait for David's comments.
>
> [...]

Friendly ping.  We'll probably miss the hard-freeze but would still be
good to ask for an unblock early.

-- 
Regards,
Xiyue Deng

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: