Re: prerm/postrm considered harmful in M-A: same packages

Hi! On Wed, 2014-01-15 at 16:40:16 -0800, Steve Langasek wrote: > On Thu, Nov 07, 2013 at 03:37:26PM +0100, Guillem Jover wrote: > > dpkg 1.17.2 will setup DPKG_MAINTSCRIPT_PACKAGE_REFCOUNT to make this > > easier to handle. The aforementioned thread contains recipes on how to > > do proper ref-co

Re: prerm/postrm considered harmful in M-A: same packages

Hi folks, On Thu, Nov 07, 2013 at 03:37:26PM +0100, Guillem Jover wrote: > dpkg 1.17.2 will setup DPKG_MAINTSCRIPT_PACKAGE_REFCOUNT to make this > easier to handle. The aforementioned thread contains recipes on how to > do proper ref-counting with older dpkg versions. Thanks for implementing this

Re: prerm/postrm considered harmful in M-A: same packages

Hi! On Thu, 2013-11-07 at 14:34:11 +0100, Josselin Mouette wrote: > I noticed a problem with several packages when they were migrated to > multiarch, and I’m afraid we have a pattern here. This was reported on this list some time ago:

prerm/postrm considered harmful in M-A: same packages

Hi, I noticed a problem with several packages when they were migrated to multiarch, and I’m afraid we have a pattern here. Here, libfoo is a Multi-Arch: same package. libfoo.postinst: → Generate /etc/libfoo.conf → Modify /etc/bar.conf to add libfoo support (think typically NSS modules) The pos