debconf problem in foomatic-filters
Hi there,
I have the following problem when trying to re-install foomatic-filters
on my system. One of the recent upgrades broke the package. Can
anybody tell from the information below where the problem should be
reported?
Package maintainer Chris Lawrence has not yet responded.
Sincerely,
Felix
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: debconf problem in foomatic-filters
Date: Sun, 06 May 2007 09:43:34 -0500
From: Felix Lechner
To: Chris Lawrence
Hello Chris,
I have a problem installing foomatic-filters_3.0.2-20061031-1.2_all.deb.
For some reason, the config mechanism for "foomatic-filters/gspath"
fails. I suspect the templates file is not read correctly.
I checked the bug reports and could not find a matching description.
With DEBCONF_DEBUG set to 'developer', the installation produces the
following output:
debconf (developer): <-- INPUT low foomatic-filters/gspath
debconf (developer): --> 10 "foomatic-filters/gspath" doesn't exist
debconf (developer): <-- GO
debconf (developer): --> 0 ok
debconf (developer): <-- GET foomatic-filters/gspath
debconf (developer): --> 10 foomatic-filters/gspath doesn't exist
dpkg: error processing foomatic-filters (--install):
subprocess post-installation script returned error exit status 10
Errors were encountered while processing:
foomatic-filters
Setting "gspath" manually in your config file by including
db_set foomatic-filters/gspath "gs" ;
only produces another error message:
debconf (developer): <-- SET foomatic-filters/gspath gs
debconf (developer): --> 10 foomatic-filters/gspath doesn't exist
dpkg: error processing foomatic-filters (--install):
subprocess post-installation script returned error exit status 10
Errors were encountered while processing:
foomatic-filters
All that makes me suspect the templates file is not parsed correctly.
The question for "gspath" is defined in the templates file but not
called---even if debconf is reconfigured to prompt for low priorities.
Do you know why that would happen? I even installed two versions of
ghostscript for a choice but could not trigger the question.
Could there be a problem with debconf or UTF-8, or possibly the
translations in the templates file? I am trying to figure out why
debconf acts that way.
My system is a testing/unstable hybrid.
Thank you for maintaining such a complicated package.
Sincerely,
Felix
Reply to: