> > Any idea how this scenario could unfold? I cannot imagine how it > > could > > get there. What I will do, though, is add a "Breaks: man-db > > (<<2.9.3- > > 1)" to bsdmainutils. Actually this is already in git. > > Breaks only ensures that new bsdmainutils can't be unpacked until > man-db > is deconfigured. For example, it would still permit this plausible > upgrade ordering, which AFAIK apt would have no particular reason to > avoid: > > 1. deconfigure old man-db > 2. unpack new bsdmainutils > 3. configure new bsdmainutils > 4. (piles of other stuff) > 5. unpack bsdextrautils > 6. unpack new man-db > 7. configure bsdextrautils > 8. configure man-db > > man would be broken between the end of step 1 and the end of step > 5. I > think this is undesirable and unnecessary.
Good points. However, I still don't see where this creates problems in the upgrade process unless some postinst calls man. Michael -- Michael Meskes Michael at Fam-Meskes dot De, Michael at Meskes dot (De|Com|Net|Org) Meskes at (Debian|Postgresql) dot Org Jabber: michael at xmpp dot meskes dot org VfL Borussia! Força Barça! SF 49ers! Use Debian GNU/Linux, PostgreSQL
