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

Re: Caught in the act

On Fri, Feb 16, 2001 at 12:15:12AM +0100, Martin Albert wrote:
> -- Would that be 'legal' anyway? Modifiying installed files of one pkg 
> by the scripts of another? (They're closely related however and chances 
> are good that after all this weird stuff, the next pkg to be removed 
> would be the manipulated -dev anyway).

If both packages agree on a policy to do this, this should be no
problem (see e.g. apache, emacs, perl,...). And if you are the
maintainer of both packages you even don't need to write that
policy down. Just make sure it works as expected.

> -- If so, is there a place to find the dpkg base directory. I would 
> have to rewrite the filelist.

This is a bad idea because dpkg keeps an internal copy of the
filelists in its internal memory on installation. In addition to
that you would modify the files of another package (dpkg) without
a policy both packages agree about. Simple answer: don't do this.

> -- If not, what else besides leaving those silly programs out could i 
> do? Is there a 'use-by date' for old pkgs? Else i can only hope that 
> upstream bump up its version soon ...

Did you read about diversions and alternatives (dpkg-divert(8) and
update-alternatives(8))? But please, if you use these features,
make sure you give your maintainer scripts a decent testing,
because you can mess up quite well if you don't use them

16                      Hard coded constant for amount of room allowed for
                        cache align and faster forwarding (tunable)

-- seen in /usr/src/linux-2.2.14/net/TUNABLE

Reply to: