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

Re: Bug#224509: [PROPOSAL] Correct spurious promise regarding TTY availability



On Fri, 19 Dec 2003 16:45:06 +0100, Tore Anderson <tore@linpro.no> said: 

>   Current policy says a controlling terminal is guaranteed to be
>  available in the maintainer scripts.  This is simply not true, for
>  dpkg will happily run without one - which makes all scripts that
>  make explicit use of /dev/tty (as policy recommends) fail with the
>  error message '/dev/tty: No such device or address'.

	The current practice is that maintainer scripts may depend on
 a controlling tty. Sure, dpkg can be run without a controlling tty,
 in which case things shall break. "Don't do that, then".

	This can't just be simply changed without a trong reason to do
 so, and without a plan on how the transition is to be affected.

	manoj
-- 
Love may laugh at locksmiths, but he has a profound respect for money
bags. Sidney Paternoster, "The Folly of the Wise"
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: