On Mon, 21 Jan 2008, Roger Leigh wrote: > > Maybe we could integrate those shell functions into the dpkg package > > itself until dpkg is fixed to handle them better. At least, dpkg could > > replace them with no-op when the proper support is in place. > > A fix in dpkg would, IMO, be ideal. I think that the case of dropped > conffiles should really be being handled properly by dpkg in any case. > I'm not sure why it can't just keep track of them until you purge the > package, or delete them outright. Either way, I don't see the need to > leave such as basic task to be implemented by every package maintainer > who ever removes a conffile.
Guillem said he would investigate how much work it is to fix dpkg in this regard. But w've lived with this for years without much problems so I don't think > In the meantime, having the shell functions in dpkg itself would be > very useful. However, how will etch->lenny upgrades work without a > new dpkg containing the functions? A simple versioned dependency is enough for using them in the postinst and the new dpkg will be unpacked before the configuration of any package depending on it. Cheers, -- Raphaël Hertzog Le best-seller français mis à jour pour Debian Etch : http://www.ouaza.com/livre/admin-debian/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
