"ext Guillem Jover" <[email protected]> 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? I don't know enough about update-alternatives, actually, so I'll shut up. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected]
