Josip Rodin <j...@srce.hr> writes:
> On Mon, Nov 03, 2003 at 06:49:41PM +0900, YAMASHITA Junji wrote:
>> I noticed that desktop-base package adds local diversion, reported as
>> Bug#218091. I supposed that this isn't a right thing and is a serious
>> bug.
>> But I can't find a description of this point in the debian-policy.
> Well, you should have made it a serious bug on the ground of being
> common sense :)
> Section 3.10. Maintainer Scripts that says
> You should not use `dpkg-divert' on a file belonging to another
> package without consulting the maintainer of that package first.
> ...could probably extended to say that --local should never be used
> because it's too generic, rather --package. With items that need
> diversion of two, three or more packages, it begs the question, why not
> use alternatives?
Here is a proposed patch. This has been checked by Lintian for a while.
The current Lintian tag report is:
http://lintian.debian.org/tags/package-uses-local-diversion.html
and shows only one package that has this issue, and that package is only
doing this to clean up after a bug in a previous version of the package.
Objections or seconds?
diff --git a/policy.sgml b/policy.sgml
index 9fe7158..587a6b2 100644
--- a/policy.sgml
+++ b/policy.sgml
@@ -1214,9 +1214,11 @@
</p>
<p>
- You should not use <prgn>dpkg-divert</prgn> on a file
- belonging to another package without consulting the
- maintainer of that package first.
+ You should not use <prgn>dpkg-divert</prgn> on a file belonging
+ to another package without consulting the maintainer of that
+ package first. Package maintainer scripts must provide
+ the <tt>--package</tt> flag to <prgn>dpkg-divert</prgn> and must
+ not use <tt>--local</tt>.
</p>
<p>
--
Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
