On Fri, 2009-01-09 at 13:26:31 +0200, Marius Vollmer wrote: > Guillem Jover" <guil...@debian.org> writes: > > > But if we require packages to be updated, wouldn't it be enough if they > > > ignored errors reported by update-alternatives for optional > > > alternatives? > > > > They can do that already if all the names to be set are optional (all > > --install and all --slave). But not the case when --install is mandatory > > but some --slave are not. > > Just for completeness of the discussion: you could call > update-alternatives individually for each file, and check ignore errors > (or not) individually, no?
You could and you can with the current u-a, but that's a pretty nasty bug that should be fixed (will be filing later), as it will mess up the database. The thing is that each link group should be in sync, and that will not happen if each call is done per file. regards, guillem -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
