update-updmap questions/issues

["C.M. Connelly" <cmc@debian.org>]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1




Atsuhito,

I'm packaging the CM-Super fonts, and taking advantage of your
update-updmap script to make it easier (thanks!).

I have noticed one small problem, however.

In the manpage, you say

   Note 10foo.cfg should be a configuration file and be renamed at
   "remove" to something like 10foo.bak and be removed at "purge"
   in postrm.
 
Following that advice leads to some issues with the package system
during reinstalls (``upgrades'', reinstalls in place, or removals
and reinstallations).

When the package is removed, the system assumes that all of its
conffiles are left intact on the system.  Our postrm script
renames the file so it isn't seen by update-updmap, but the system
doesn't know that.  When the package is reinstalled, the system
checks its records, which claim that the conffile is still
present, and doesn't reinstall the conffile.

Purging the package and reinstalling works fine.

Possible ways of dealing with the problem include

   1. Ignoring your advice in the manpage, removing the code that
      renames the file from the postrm, and allowing the useless
      lines to remain in /etc/texmf/updmap.cfg.

   2. Adding code to the postinst to check to be sure that the
      configuration file is actually present, and to rename the
      .bak file to .cfg if necessary.

   3. Modifying the postinst and postrm scripts to generate and
      remove (or rename) the configuration file rather than
      including it as a conffile.

   4. Getting dpkg fixed so that it can actually tell if the file
      is present on the system with the name it's supposed to
      have.

I'm leaning toward option 3 -- I already generate the
configuration file in the debian/rules script, and could pop it
into /usr/share/cm-super as an ``example'' file (that could be
copied intact to /etc/texmf/updmap.d if the configuration file was
missing).

I would appreciate any thoughts you (or Julian, or Christoph, or
anyone else following debian-tetex-maint) have to offer on this
topic.  Presumably whatever we come up with could be used as a
guideline by anyone considering packaging fonts for use with TeX.
No matter what, though, I think the manpage should be changed.

   Claire

+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+
 Man cannot be civilised, or be kept civilised by what he does in his
	    spare time; only by what he does as his work.
			     W.R. Lethaby
+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+
  C.M. Connelly               cmc@debian.org                   SHC, DS
+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.0 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Processed by Mailcrypt 3.5.8 <http://mailcrypt.sourceforge.net/>

iD8DBQE+SC2szrFKeh3cmQ0RAmEXAJ47AEcv9bBRKnf3FvSgqeUwX+BnzgCdFuI3
vsQnk6JMAMz5+cWiaUbuw58=
=H3w8
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----