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

Re: To fix or not to fix in lenny?


On Sun, Jun 07, 2009 at 10:02:44PM +0200, Frank Küster wrote:
> a FTBFS problem on a buildd has revealed a bug in tex-common's
> maintainer script boilerplates which are used to create the postrm
> scripts for texlive-$allofthem and some other packages.
> In the corner case that the package - which has the problematic postrm -
> is unpacked, but not its dependency tex-common, the postrm will fail
> when the unpacked is trying to be removed.  This is not a RC bug by the
> wording, since we just assumed that what policy says is implemented. But
> of course it is a serious bug in reality.
> We'll fix that in unstable, but should we also fix it for a stable point
> release? It would mean rebuilding 5 texlive source packages and a couple
> of others against a new tex-common. And only for a corner case, which is
> likely to happen only when some other problem breaks a dpkg run, and
> *not* upon upgrade from lenny to squeeze. (Because either tex-common is
> already installed before the upgrade, or the new, not-buggy package
> would be unpacked without tex-common present.)

I don't think this is necessary.

If the timebomb (entirely unrelated to this issue) is still unfixed in Etch,
that ought to be fixed, though.

Kind regards,
Philipp Kern
 .''`.  Philipp Kern                        Debian Developer
: :' :  http://philkern.de                         Stable Release Manager
`. `'   xmpp:phil@0x539.de                         Wanna-Build Admin
  `-    finger pkern/key@db.debian.org

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: