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

Bug#504880: Disambiguate "installed" for packages

Raphael Hertzog <hertzog@debian.org> writes:

> Please find a proposed patch in attachment. Feel free to reword/improve
> if needed.

Is the reason why you can't rely on configured for the prerm case the same
reason why you can't rely on it for the postinst case: because of breaking
circular dependencies and choosing one package to deconfigure first?  It
just seems conceptually odd to use Pre-Depends for a dependency for a
removal script.

I'm a little concerned that this sounds like an implicit encouragement to
use Pre-Depends more because you can rely on it, and I don't think we want
to do that.  I'm not entirely sure how to avoid that, though, and in
context there are other warnings against using Pre-Depends.  What we
really want to do is actively discourage circular dependencies, since in
the absence of circular dependencies, Depends works as expected and you
can rely on packages being configured for postinst and prerm dependencies.

What happens if there are circular Pre-Depends?  Does dpkg just give up at
that point and throw a fatal error?

Russ Allbery (rra@debian.org)               <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>

Reply to: