Bug#264241: Some corrections regardings statements in this bug
On 12.08.04 Adrian Bunk (bunk@fs.tum.de) wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 12, 2004 at 01:44:22PM +0200, Hilmar Preusse wrote:
Hi Adrian,
> > 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.
>
Sorry, I have no clue, what exactly he's referring to. I just
thought, it is a general (policy) issue, that we assume some things
to be existent which aren't.
> > > (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.
>
Maybe I'm dumb. If you do the experiment: Install tetex-base, -bin,
-extra and then purge tetex-extra he'll call mktexlsr. Same happens
on remove.
> > 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?
>
H.
--
sigmentation fault
Reply to: