On Wed, 2004-03-10 at 07:59, Wichert Akkerman wrote:
> Previously Brian J. Murrell wrote:
> > This much I know: I need to set "Depends: bee" in "eh"'s control file
> > to have the brand new "bee" package installed during the upgrade of
> > "eh".
>
> Right.
>
> > But the twist is that "eh" needs to be configured (I don't care what
> > order they are unpacked in) prior to "bee" because "eh"('s postinst)
> > does work that needs to be done before "bee"'s configuration/postinst
> > can be done.
>
> Ugh. The only way I can think of to enforce that is to have bee
> Pre-Depend on eh, but I'm not quite sure it that will work as well since
> it isn't a standard dependency cycle which dpkg will break.OK. Not having tried your Pre-Depends solution yet, would moving the operation that needs to be done in "eh"s postinst prior "bee"s postinst into "eh"s preinst be a better solution? Would that ensure that the operation will be done before "bee"s postinst? So to summarize, if I have "eh" depend on "bee" and have "eh-op" in "eh"s preinst and "bee-op" in "bee"'s postinst, doing a --dist-upgrade will upgrade "eh", pull in "bee" and ensure that "eh-op" will run before "bee-op". Am I correct? Is this a vaild option? b. -- My other computer is your Microsoft Windows server. Brian J. Murrell
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
