Re: Order of package removal
* Frank Küster [Wed, 15 Dec 2004 16:43:34 +0100]:
> for some reason, I am in trouble. Can I make any assumptions about this?
ok, I was missing the point (I thought that the "trouble" was having
/var/lib/tetex not removed and left empty) but now I see that the
real trouble is the font-package postrm not finding the /var/lib/tetex
I don't know what the outcome of the "in which order are scripts
called", but in any case why don't you (*):
- have each of the font-packges that will need /var/lib/tetex on
postrm ship a /var/lib/tetex/<package name>.emtpy file, so that
"trouble" can never happen.
or you could just mkdir it if it can't be found...
(*) this would gain you the confidence that your system is robust
even if for some odd reason the postrm call order gets garbled,
even if you checked that is as you spect in 'normal' situations.
also, if instead of:
> tetex-base package. This directory, /var/lib/tetex, would be generated
> in tetex-base's postinst script,
you just ship it in the package, dpkg won't remove it if there are
files there that he knows nothing about and perhaps will even remove
it by itself when it detects it has become empty (but not sure about
EM: asp16 [ykwim] alu.ua.es | PK: DA6AE621
Listening to: Astrud - Hay un hombre en España
The most exciting phrase to hear in science, the one that heralds new
discoveries, is not "Eureka!" (I found it!) but "That's funny..."
-- Isaac Asimov