| Frank Lichtenheld 2005-10-31, 8:50 pm |
| On Mon, Oct 31, 2005 at 06:56:44PM +0100, Frank Küster wrote:
> In my opinion this is not a bug (except if the package is crucial for
> the system to work and be reachable, like ssh) - the local admin simply
> has to review the changes to conffiles that dpkg requested, and have a
> look at NEWS.Debian and changelog.Debian. If these files do not contain
> enough information to fix the system, then this is a bug, right? But
> the simple fact that a postinst script fails because a change has been
> refused isn't - and for sure it is not a serious or grave bug,
> severities often used when a postinst fails.
>
> Opinions?
There is one big problem with that scenario that I haven't seen
mentioned in this thread yet: If I make the dist-upgrade of a machine
from sarge to etch and the dist-upgrade fails right in the middle
of the installed 3000 packages I will be severly disappointed to
say the least if that didn't happen for a very good reason...
That's a fact that often gets lost when discussing such problem from
developer to developer that install sid on their machines and update
about 30 packages at once.
So if it is at all possible to avoid failing the postinst (which of
course also means to not break other packages installation as you
have pointed out) it should be done.
If it is at all possible in the case of tetex I can't tell, though.
Gruesse,
--
Frank Lichtenheld <djpig@debian.org>
www: http://www.djpig.de/
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
|