On Mon, Oct 04, 1999 at 08:15:54AM +1000, Herbert Xu wrote: > > > I think the worst case would be a telnetd linked with a broken > > > shlib (or in the case of telnetd, perhaps a missing or broken > > > /usr/lib/telnetd/login) that gives a security hole. If you wish > > > to minimise downtime, the proper way to do it IMHO is to have > > > certain packages flagged as daemons, and they should be upgraded > > > (by whatever program that is in charge) one by one.
On Sun, Oct 03, 1999 at 07:06:10PM -0400, Raul Miller wrote: > > Under what circumstances would this be in effect during an upgrade > > but not otherwise? On Mon, Oct 04, 1999 at 09:57:35AM +1000, Herbert Xu wrote: > The fact that dpkg does not deconfigure a package which depends on > another deconfigured package is a bug in dpkg. This should not be used > as an excuse to not deal with things correctly in maintainer scripts. Ok, if dpkg didn't have this "bug", how would this bug be triggered? -- Raul
