Re: trigger question for tex-common
Norbert Preining writes ("Re: trigger question for tex-common"):
> The update-* scripts do the following: They check if a .dpkg-new script
> is present for a config file (in /etc/texmf/updmap.d, fmt.d, language.d)
> and if that part of the snippet is NOT included in the final config
> file.
!
I don't think this can be right.
> if [ -f "${file}.dpkg-new" ]; then
> do_not_include_file "$file"
> else
I don't think testing for .dpkg-new is right. Let me go back a step:
why won't including the file work ? Is it possible to detect that
condition explicitly, or depend on something more closely associated
with it ?
You seem to be explaining how your current (or planned) maintainer
scripts work. Can we leave that aside for the moment while you
explain how (La)TeX works ? That is, what are the various moving
parts that (La)TeX has and what steps it requires, etc. ?
> So if root is calling
> update-updmap
> and that script calls
> dpkg-trigger ...
> *nothing* happens even when calling
> dpkg --configure -a
> afterwards?
No, all the processing is deferred to dpkg --configure -a. What I
meant was that if the sysadmin runs update-something they should not
be expected to run dpkg --configure -a as well.
> I will now work on implementing the whiole stuff as normal triggers
> called texmf-* and that the postinst of package using it simply call the
> update-* scripts.
I still think that the design needs some work. The parts I don't
understand but need to in order to make sensible suggestions are the
(La)TeX parts.
Ian.
Reply to: