Re: Depends: and commands used in maintainer scripts
X-Posting to -policy, because this might be a bug in Policy. I'm not
subscribed to -policy, please Cc me unless you keep -devel in.
Goswin von Brederlow <brederlo@informatik.uni-tuebingen.de> wrote:
> Joel Aelwyn <fenton@debian.org> writes:
>
>> On Wed, Jan 26, 2005 at 11:32:19AM +0100, Frank Küster wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> what is the reason why in the following sentence in Policy:
>>>
>>> ,----
>>> | The Depends field should also be used if the postinst, prerm or postrm
>>> | scripts require the package to be present in order to run.
>>> `----
>>>
>>> the word "should" is used, not "must"? I'm asking here (not on -policy)
>>> because I assume there must be a technical reason for it, but I really
>>> can't think of any.
[...]
> It should still be must so failure to do so is a serious policy
> violation (violation of a 'must' or 'required' directive).
Do others also think this is an error in policy? Nobody would object if
I raise severity of such a bug and address it in an NMU (which I'm going
to do for a different RC bug, anyway)?
Regards, Frank
--
Frank Küster
Inst. f. Biochemie der Univ. Zürich
Debian Developer
Reply to: