Bug#595652: db packages failing to install...
Holger Levsen <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> please clarify what the right behaviour should be and how failing to
> install without a local db should be treated. Thanks.
I agree with jcristau; I think it's reasonable to have database servers be
in Recommends, to have postinst prompt for what database to use, and if
one choses a remote database that doesn't exist or if one has no database
to choose, to have the package configuration fail.
It's definitely worth talking about if the draft database policy says
something else, as it appears to. My rationale is that the package setup
may simply require a database; some packages don't have a meaningful
stand-alone installation with no database support. I think it makes more
sense to fail the configure step than it does to require that the user run
dpkg --reconfigure later to re-run the package setup.
Failure to install after one has either declined to answer high-priority
debconf questions or answered them "incorrectly" is definitely not, in
general, RC, although it may be a bug (of the regular sort). See Policy
For high-priority prompts without a reasonable default answer,
maintainer scripts may abort if there is no controlling
terminal. However, this situation should be avoided if at all
possible, since it prevents automated or unattended installs. In most
cases, users will consider this to be a bug in the package.
Russ Allbery (email@example.com) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>