Re: Wht remove /usr/local dirs in prerm rather than postrm?
Remco Blaakmeer <remco@Cal011205.student.utwente.nl> writes:
> > Is there some good reason? I guess it depends on the interpretation
> > of "postrm".
> >
> > It seemed to me like it might make sense to remove them in the postrm
> > where you know that anything that might have referenced this directory
> > is gone, and can't be executed again.
> >
> > Just curious. I don't think it'll affect me one way or the other. I
> > did have the emacsen-common package doing some final cleanup in the
> > postrm (removing files that had been created in the preinst). I
> > suppose given this policy, I should probably change that too...
>
> Just curious. What are you doing in /usr/local? I thought no package
> should touch /usr/local.
Check out the policy manual, I think it's section 3. You're allowed
to touch /usr/local, but only to *try* to create directories (like
/usr/local/emacs/site-lisp), but you're not allowed to die if it
fails. That's primarily to accomodate systems with read-only
/usr/locals.
--
Rob Browning <rlb@cs.utexas.edu>
PGP fingerprint = E8 0E 0D 04 F5 21 A0 94 53 2B 97 F5 D6 4E 39 30
--
E-mail the word "unsubscribe" to debian-policy-request@lists.debian.org
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST. Trouble? E-mail to listmaster@lists.debian.org
Reply to: