Bug#89674: PROPOSAL] Clarify ldconfig usage
On Thu, Mar 15, 2001 at 12:57:17AM -0800, Joey Hess wrote:
> Herbert Xu wrote:
> > When did this (postinst can only call ldconfig if $1 = configure) become
> > policy? Not only is this pointless, it also means that a lot of packages are
> > now in violation of this policy. I propose that the "and only if" phrase be
> > removed from the above sentence.
>
> Er, the text in the packaging (now policy) manual about this has existed
> from time immemorial, and has always included an explination of why this
> restriction exists. This is nothing new.
Yes this sentence did exist in the packaging manual, however, there was
never any explanation of why the postinst script must not call ldconfig if
$1 isn't set to configure. I don't see any reasons why it shouldn't either
since by the time dpkg calls the postinst script, the temporary files no
longer exist.
What is new is that this sentence now has the weight of policy. So we now
have dozens of perfectly functioning library packages that have serious bugs
in bugs in them.
--
Debian GNU/Linux 2.2 is out! ( http://www.debian.org/ )
Email: Herbert Xu ~{PmV>HI~} <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au>
Home Page: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/
PGP Key: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/pubkey.txt
Reply to: