Re: Bug#741481: Error in `/usr/share/doc-base/mutt', line 14: all `Format' sections are invalid.
Hi!
On Sat, 2014-03-15 at 20:55:38 +0100, Evgeni Golov wrote:
> [ CCing src:dpkg and src:apt as I have no idea why this is happening ]
> On Wed, Mar 12, 2014 at 10:51:11PM +0100, Michael Biebl wrote:
> > During the latest upgrade, I got the following error message:
> >
> > Preparing to unpack .../mutt_1.5.22-2_amd64.deb ...
> > Unpacking mutt (1.5.22-2) ...
> > Processing triggers for man-db (2.6.6-1) ...
> > Processing triggers for desktop-file-utils (0.22-1) ...
> > Processing triggers for gnome-menus (3.8.0-2) ...
> > Processing triggers for mime-support (3.54) ...
> > Processing triggers for doc-base (0.10.5) ...
> > Processing 1 added doc-base file...
> > Error in `/usr/share/doc-base/mutt', line 14: all `Format' sections are
> > invalid.
> > Note: `install-docs --verbose --check file_name' may give more details
> > about the above error.
> > Registering documents with scrollkeeper...
> > Processing triggers for menu (2.1.46) ...
> > Setting up mutt (1.5.22-2) ...
> > update-alternatives: using /usr/bin/mutt-org to provide /usr/bin/mutt
> > (mutt) in auto mode
> > Processing triggers for menu (2.1.46) ...
>
> This is interesting. It sliped my testing of the change ([1]), as I
> installed the package directly via dpkg, where mutt.postinst and the
> doc-base triggers are run in the "correct" order (first mutt postinst,
> then the triggered stuff):
[…]
> In your (and later my) use of apt, doc-base is triggered *before*
> update-alternatives has created the proper links to the documentation
> and thus doc-base barfs about missing files (w/o useful message, but
> still).
>
> @dpkg/apt maintainers: I thought triggers should be run *after* the
> package is fully installed and only the order of the triggers is not
> guaranteed?
W/o having looked into the details, this just seems like another
instance of #671711. Which I'm planning to check its status again soon,
either for 1.17.7 or 1.17.8, and include the old fix depending on the
impact on the distribution.
Thanks,
Guillem
Reply to: