"Michael K. Edwards" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> What would be the impact on (c)debootstrap of changing the operation
> of dpkg? I haven't looked at the exact sequence in a while, but IIRC
> those partially-installed states have valid uses in a debootstrap run.
> For instance, an unconfigured package may not be ready for normal
> use, but may get some files into the right places so that another
> package installation can complete, and then another run of dpkg can
> fix the first package.
Afaik neither debootstrap, cdebootstrap nor rootstrap use dpkg -i to
partially install packages. They explicitly use --unpack and
--configure and use --force-* options to exactly say what they need.
If at any point dpkg returns an error (as dpkg -i would for partial
installs) then (c)debootstrap/rootstrap will stop.
> I think I'm of the "it's a low-level tool, you can shoot yourself in
> the foot if you insist on it" school. That's what the --force-* flags
> are there for -- knowingly, carefully, shooting yourself in the foot
> because that's where the anaconda has started to eat you. However,
> there might be a case for defaulting to peeking inside the new package
> to check dependencies before unpacking. One could then add a new
> --force-unpack flag to get the current behavior in scenarios like
> debootstrap.
>
> Cheers,
> - Michael
dpkg -i checking configurability before unpacking should not impact
the previously mentioned tools at all afaik.
MfG
Goswin
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
