Bug#87124: marked as done (shouldn't remove /var/state/apt if set in apt.conf)
Your message dated Thu, 22 Feb 2001 17:41:35 -0700 (MST)
with message-id <[🔎] Pine.LNX.3.96.1010222173852.23289J-100000@wakko.deltatee.com>
and subject line Bug#87124: shouldn't remove /var/state/apt if set in apt.conf
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.
(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what I am
talking about this indicates a serious mail system misconfiguration
somewhere. Please contact me immediately.)
Darren Benham
(administrator, Debian Bugs database)
--------------------------------------
Received: (at submit) by bugs.debian.org; 22 Feb 2001 21:54:44 +0000
>From korn@chardonnay.math.bme.hu Thu Feb 22 15:54:44 2001
Return-path: <korn@chardonnay.math.bme.hu>
Received: from chardonnay.math.bme.hu [::ffff:152.66.83.144]
by master.debian.org with smtp (Exim 3.12 1 (Debian))
id 14W3hD-0007Mp-00; Thu, 22 Feb 2001 15:54:43 -0600
Received: (qmail 10745 invoked by uid 1000); 22 Feb 2001 21:54:42 -0000
Message-ID: <[🔎] 20010222215442.10744.qmail@chardonnay.math.bme.hu>
From: "KORN Andras" <korn@chardonnay.math.bme.hu>
To: Debian Bug Tracking System <submit@bugs.debian.org>
Subject: shouldn't remove /var/state/apt if set in apt.conf
X-Reportbug-Version: 1.14
X-Mailer: reportbug 1.14
Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2001 22:54:41 +0100
Delivered-To: submit@bugs.debian.org
Package: apt
Version: 0.5.0
Severity: normal
Hi,
I think the postinst shouldn't just remove /var/state/apt if the apt.conf
file referenes it.
The preinst script should check whether there are references to the
/var/state/apt directory, and, if so, leave the symlink it creates in place.
Otherwise, apt is completely broken after the update.
Regards,
Andrew
--
Andrew Korn (Korn Andras) <korn@chardonnay.math.bme.hu>
Finger korn@chardonnay.math.bme.hu for pgp key. QOTD:
I am Yoda of Borg. Assimilated you will be, hmmm?
-- System Information
Debian Release: testing/unstable
Architecture: i386
Kernel: Linux chardonnay 2.4.1 #4 Mon Feb 12 16:31:13 CET 2001 i586
Versions of packages apt depends on:
ii libc6 2.2.2-1 GNU C Library: Shared libraries an
ii libstdc++2.10 1:2.95.2-14 The GNU stdc++ library
---------------------------------------
Received: (at 87124-done) by bugs.debian.org; 23 Feb 2001 00:41:37 +0000
>From jgg@debian.org Thu Feb 22 18:41:37 2001
Return-path: <jgg@debian.org>
Received: from ike-ext.ab.videon.ca [::ffff:206.75.216.35]
by master.debian.org with smtp (Exim 3.12 1 (Debian))
id 14W6Ij-0006sQ-00; Thu, 22 Feb 2001 18:41:37 -0600
Received: (qmail 18812 invoked from network); 23 Feb 2001 00:41:36 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO wakko.deltatee.com) ([24.108.173.63]) (envelope-sender <jgg@debian.org>)
by ike-ext.ab.videon.ca (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP
for <korn@chardonnay.math.bme.hu>; 23 Feb 2001 00:41:36 -0000
Received: from localhost
([127.0.0.1] helo=wakko.deltatee.com ident=jgg)
by wakko.deltatee.com with smtp (Exim 3.16 #1 (Debian))
id 14W6Ih-0006s6-00; Thu, 22 Feb 2001 17:41:35 -0700
Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2001 17:41:35 -0700 (MST)
From: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@debian.org>
X-Sender: jgg@wakko.deltatee.com
To: KORN Andras <korn@chardonnay.math.bme.hu>, 87124-done@bugs.debian.org
cc: APT Development Team <deity@lists.debian.org>
Subject: Re: Bug#87124: shouldn't remove /var/state/apt if set in apt.conf
In-Reply-To: <[🔎] 20010222215442.10744.qmail@chardonnay.math.bme.hu>
Message-ID: <[🔎] Pine.LNX.3.96.1010222173852.23289J-100000@wakko.deltatee.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Delivered-To: 87124-done@bugs.debian.org
On Thu, 22 Feb 2001, KORN Andras wrote:
> I think the postinst shouldn't just remove /var/state/apt if the apt.conf
> file referenes it.
There is no legitimate reason for doing this, I consider it to be quite
broken.
> The preinst script should check whether there are references to the
> /var/state/apt directory, and, if so, leave the symlink it creates in place.
That turns out to be considerably difficult, I think we actually decided
it might be impossible to do 100% correctly.
Jason
Reply to: