Bug#504880: Disambiguate "installed" for packages
On Sat, Feb 14, 2009 at 09:50:49PM +0100, Kurt Roeckx wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 14, 2009 at 12:16:16PM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote:
> >
> > I think this is another aspect of the same point above? My understanding
> > from the discussion and the clarified text that Raphael sent is that
> > postrm can always rely on the depended-on package being unpacked and
> > configured and prerm can always rely on it at least being unpacked, even
> > in the case of circular dependencies.
>
> As I understand it, the dependency is ignored so you can not rely on
> anything you expect for a Depends in case of circular dependencies.
Policy says that the dependency can be broken at a packages not having
a postinst script. Which seems to suggest that the other scripts
can be run without problem. But as far as I know, that's only useful
for the case of installing new packages.
During an new install, or from conffiles only, without errors, unpack does:
- preinst
- unpack
During an upgrade without errors, unpack does:
- old-prerm
- new-preinst
- unpack
- old-postrm
During remove:
- prerm
- remove files
- postrm
The first case is the only simple case, and requires a Pre-Depends if you
have a preinst script.
For the others you have a problem with the order in which the packages
are processed.
Kurt
Reply to: