Hi Steve,
Thanks for the reply. Considering the extension was actually initially
implemented in cdebconf, as explained in the debconf changelog, yes, cdebconf
does support it. I didn't check which version first introduced it, but a quick
look shows that it was present as early as 2003, so I suppose a versioned
dependency is not strictly necessary.
Thanks,
Regis
Steve Langasek <vor...@debian.org> wrote:
>tags 677278 - patch
>tags 677278 moreinfo
>thanks
>
>Hi Regis,
>
>On Tue, Jun 12, 2012 at 10:38:10PM +0200, Regis Boudin wrote:
>> As cdebconf is becoming actually usable, I started looking at
>removing
>> debconf on a test system, and noticed that libpam-runtime depends on
>> debconf only. The attached patch adds "| debconf-2.0" to the debconf
>> dependency.
>
>> Thanks in advance,
>> Regis
>
>> diff -Nru --exclude changelog pam-1.1.3/debian/control
>pam-1.1.3/debian/control
>> --- pam-1.1.3/debian/control 2012-06-12 22:03:45.000000000 +0200
>> +++ pam-1.1.3/debian/control 2012-06-12 22:03:46.000000000 +0200
>> @@ -57,7 +57,7 @@
>> Priority: required
>> Architecture: all
>> Multi-Arch: foreign
>> -Depends: ${misc:Depends}, debconf (>= 1.5.19), libpam-modules (>=
>1.0.1-6)
>> +Depends: ${misc:Depends}, debconf (>= 1.5.19) | debconf-2.0,
>libpam-modules (>= 1.0.1-6)
>> Replaces: libpam0g-util, libpam0g-dev
>> Conflicts: libpam0g-util
>> Description: Runtime support for the PAM library
>
>This change is incorrect; the versioned dependency on 'debconf' is
>required
>because pam-auth-update makes use of the x_loadtemplatefile interface.
>Does
>cdebconf support this protocol extension? If so, what version of
>cdebconf
>introduced support for it?
>
>Note that this same issue affects ucf for the same reason.
>
>Thanks,
>--
>Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free
>OS
>Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the
>world.
>Ubuntu Developer
>http://www.debian.org/
>slanga...@ubuntu.com
>vor...@debian.org
--
Sent from my phone. Please excuse my brevity.
