Re: New packaging manual draft
Hi,
Yet another version is up at
http://master.debian.org/%7Esrivasta/new-packaging.txt
>>"Jason" == Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@ualberta.ca> writes:
Jason> AFIAK this is an error:
Jason> All but `Pre-Depends' (discussed below) take effect
Jason> _only_ when a package is to be configured. They do not
Jason> prevent a package being on the system in an unconfigured
Jason> state while its dependencies are
Jason> It should be All but 'Pre-Depends' and 'Conflicts'.
Done.
Jason> The rest of the paragraph is also misleading. At any arbitary
Jason> time it is possible for any Depends relations to become un
Jason> satisfied either due to an invalid version of a newly
Jason> installed package or due to the target package being unpacked.
Ummm, could you propose corrected wording, then? Are you
saying that pre depends and conflicts can now prevent a package being
on the system in an unconfigured state? Or are all bets off when a
new package is unpacked?
Jason> `dpkg' will not configure packages whose
Jason> dependencies aren't satisfied. If it is asked to
Jason> make an installation which would cause an installed
Jason> package's dependencies to become unsatisfied it will
Jason> complain [1], unless `--auto-deconfigure' is
Jason> specified, in which case those packages will be
Jason> deconfigured before the installation proceeds.
Jason> IIRC this is just completely false. Dpkg breaks reverse dependencies
Jason> without any error or warning - that is how it must operate.
Hmm. Reverse dependencies are never mentioned here, so I think
completely false is a trifle strong.
Jason> However, when a package declaring a predependency is
Jason> being unpacked the predependency can be satisfied
Jason> even if the depended-on package(s) are only unpacked
Jason> or half-configured,
Jason> I don't think this is true..
Jason> There seems to be missing a discussion on how dependencies and
Jason> essential packages relate to maintainer scripts. There are
Jason> some unobvious side effects here that should be noted
Jason> explicitly - like removal scripts can't rely on
Jason> pre-depends/depends and pre-inst can not rely on depends, etc.
Are you sure that is policy? Seems to me that belongs in a
devel guide, since it is the only correct way way to create the
scripts.
Jason> The list of fields section is massively incomplete.. I have
Jason> the full list someplace if someone would like to document them
Jason> all.
It is meant to be inconplete. I have now mentioned the
fact. This is only a list of fields for which we have a policy
dictum, and is nowhere near exhaustive.
manoj
--
Hurewitz's Memory Principle: The chance of forgetting something is
directly proportional to... to... uh.....
Manoj Srivastava <srivasta@debian.org> <http://www.debian.org/%7Esrivasta/>
1024R/C7261095 print CB D9 F4 12 68 07 E4 05 CC 2D 27 12 1D F5 E8 6E
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B 924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C
Reply to: