Marc Haber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > tags #334660 unreproducible > >> tetex-bin 3.0-9 depends on tetex-base (>= 3.0-4), which depends on >> tex-common. tex-common provides a sane 05TeXMF.cnf, but additionally >> tetex-bin introduces TEXMFSYSVAR into texmf.cnf even if it is missing - >> exactly to prevent this bug from happening. > > I reported the bug from a different system than the one the bug > happened on. The originating system cannot send e-mail. So, please do > not rely on the package versions listed. Sorry for botching this.
But it would still be interesting to see the listing from the buggy system. You can use reportbug with some option to write to a file. >> And do you think you can reproduce this bug (e.g. by going back to the >> old state of the conffiles) and have the tetex-bin postinst script run >> with set -x in the function sanitize_texmfcnf? > > I cannot even reproduce the bug in a test chroot :-( If it would be easy to reproduce the bug in a chroot, it wouldn't have made its way into unstable. I tested many upgrades from sid to experimental. So if it is reproducible, it's probably on the system where it occurred first. Regards, Frank -- Frank Küster Inst. f. Biochemie der Univ. Zürich Debian Developer
