On Wed, Jul 20, 2005 at 08:40:29PM +0200, Frank Küster wrote: > uwe@steinmann.cx (Uwe Steinmann) wrote: > > > On Wed, Jul 20, 2005 at 06:53:32PM +0200, Frank Küster wrote: > > > >> Do you know whether there have been any cases where a buggy zope package > >> caused the restart to fail? And if yes, what will happen (error > >> messages, what state are which packages in, and dpkg as a whole)? > > I haven't had a case, but from looking at the mechanism used there > > aren't many potential points of failure. Each zope extension package > > just needs to create a file or not. In the worst case the postinst > > script of the zope extension fails to create the file and doesn't > > restart zope itself. > > So the zope case is really simple Would the tetex case be more complex? I don't think so. > > I wouldn't mind if the tetex package offer something similar. I > > personaly have many styles and fonts put into individual debian > > packages. Installing more than 5 at a time is very anoying since > > it takes for ever. > > I would be glad if we could do it. But in the last months, nearly every > action we were/are doing in a postinst script failed somewhere, even a > "cp -a". And if things can fail, it won't be clear who is responsible > if we take the zope approach. The tetex.postinst will not neccessarily be modified. tetex just needs to provide the hook for /etc/apt/apt.conf.d/ and a script which does all the stuff that needs to be done to actually make the new package (a latex style or font) available for the user (like calling texhash). I'm just not sure if this is always the same procedure indepented on whether a style, a font or some other tex/latex package is installed. It is up to the maintainers of the extra style files and fonts to use the mechanism or not. They have to add extra code to their postinst scripts. Uwe -- MMK GmbH, Universitaetsstr. 11, 58097 Hagen Uwe.Steinmann@mmk-hagen.de Tel: +2331 840446 Fax: +2331 843920
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature