On Wed, Aug 23, 2006 at 11:15:22AM -0500, Gerfried Fuchs wrote: > I just stumbled in a nasty bug in apache (stable) that used a > non-essential package in its postinst. I looked if the same was still > true for unstable, and found that apache2 uses also a script from a > non-essential package (update-rc.d) and fails if it isn't present. > Though, said script is in the (pre-)dependency chain of an essential > package. I am quite sure that one can depend on the dependencies of > essential packages being resolved when using the postrm, though as the > package itself isn't itself essential at least aba wanted the point to > be raised and be made clear for the release policy. $ 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? 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? Cheers, -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. vorlon@debian.org http://www.debian.org/
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature