Bug#264241: Some corrections regardings statements in this bug
On Thu, Aug 12, 2004 at 01:44:22PM +0200, Hilmar Preusse wrote:
> On 11.08.04 Adrian Bunk (bunk@fs.tum.de) wrote:
>
> Hi,
Hi Hilmar,
> > Some corrections regarding statements in this bug ("postrm assumes
> > mktexlsr is available").
> >
> > <-- snip -->
> >
> > Ryan Murray:
> > > You can't assume that any of your dependencies are available in
> > > your postrm script, so you need to handle the case where mktexlsr
> > > has already been removed.
> >
> > mktexlsr is in tetex-bin.
> >
> > tetex-extra depends on tetex-bin.
> >
> > Section 7.2. of your policy states:
> >
> > <-- snip -->
> > ...
> > The `Depends' field should also be used if the `postinst',
> > `prerm' or `postrm' scripts require the package to be present in
> > order to run. Note, however, that the `postrm' cannot rely on
> > any non-essential packages to be present during the `purge'
> > phase.
> > ...
> > <-- snip -->
> >
> > Could you explain your statement which exactly contradicts your policy
> >
> So, what are you trying to tell me? As far as I understand you tell
> me, that this bug is not a bug.
A failed postrm is a bug, but as far as I can see, the problem is not
that mktexlsr wasn't available.
> > (note that the tetex-extra postinst does nothing during purge)?
> >
> mktexlsr is intended to be called in case of upgrade, remove or purge.
> Hence we don't check $1, but call it unconditionally.
As far as I can see, it's not called during purge.
>...
> The more convenient solution could be to remove to bashism. Should
> not be that hard in this special case. I'm not sure, if command is a
> bashism or if it is available in dash too.
>...
It's currently not even 100% clear why the postrm fails.
@Ryan:
Could you reproduce the problem, and if yes, what's the output with a
"set -x" in the postrm script?
> Thanks,
> H.
cu
Adrian
--
"Is there not promise of rain?" Ling Tan asked suddenly out
of the darkness. There had been need of rain for many days.
"Only a promise," Lao Er said.
Pearl S. Buck - Dragon Seed
Reply to: