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

Re: fails to purge not RC



Hi,

debian-release@ is not a discussion list, so if you hit reply, please remove 
debian-release@ from the recipients. Thank you.

On Donnerstag, 16. Dezember 2010, Jonathan Nieder wrote:
> > I know >50 packages failing to purge properly (+ which need bug filing),
> > but I dont think failing to purge is serious. Definitly not at this stage
> > of the release process I'd say :)
> Could you elaborate?  I would think that making "dpkg --purge" exit
> with nonzero status would be serious, though perhaps of the can-defer
> kind.

It's annoying, it will probably leave cruft and it's a policy violation. But 
that about it. The exit code is trivial to workaround (just expect that purge 
will fail for some package, it's a safe bet) and there are basically no 
consequences. (Except cruft on the system.) 

At the end of this the dpkg database is in an ok state.

So IMO nothing serious. Important, yes.

> > (Plus 27 packages, which even fail to install - but see #595652 for why I
> > stopped filing those as serious atm and see
> Failure to install noninteractively sounds less severe[1] than failure
> to purge.
> [1] http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?msg=20;bug=595652

You should have continued until msg=30 and 52 ;-) 

In short: failing to install non-interactivly is ie a problem for automated 
installations and live-media builds. IOW: in getting the software deployed, 
not getting rid off it. 

At the end of this the dpkg database is _not_ in an ok state.

That seems more severe to me.


cheers,
	Holger

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.


Reply to: