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

Re: Dependencies of Essential good enough for postrm?

* Steve Langasek <vorlon@debian.org> [2006-08-23 18:23]:
> $ grep -l update-rc.d /var/lib/dpkg/info/*.postrm|wc -l
> 99
> $
> When you say it's a "nasty" bug, do you mean this assumption actually broke
> something for you?

 Sorry for not being -v enough when writing that.  The nasty bug I
mentioned firstly was #384340 and ucf, not update-rc.d.  I guess we can
agree on that this is a real but, ucf is in no dependency chain from any
essential at all.

 update-rc.d is used in apache2 in etch, it's a completely different
issue.  And, your grep is a bit inproper, some of those have an || exit 0
after it  ;)   (which might be considered b0rked too, depending on the
content of the postrm after that line)

> I think the requirement that Essential: yes packages be usable when unpacked
> but not configured implies that their dependencies must also be minimally
> usable when unpacked but not configured, doesn't it?

 As I mentioned in the preceeding IRC discussion I consider this at most
a theoretical bug, but aba might want to have it properly addressed in
the release policy if it's considered to be too fuzzy there, which I can
understand and think is a reasonable wish.

 So long,
  * The "sarge won't release in time" new upstream release.
 -- Josselin Mouette, changelog.Debian for frozen-bubble (1.0.0-1)

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: