On Sun, Nov 27, 2005 at 11:09:07AM +0100, Bas Wijnen wrote: > Thank you for reporting this problem.
> Hello mentors, > I received bug report #339387, and want to solve it in an elegant way. The > problem is that gnocatan-meta-server used to have an rc script to start it, > but now it's a transitional package (and the script moved with the rest to > pioneers-meta-server). Appearantly not having the scripts anymore is no > reason for dpkg to remove the symlinks. > So I should do that by hand. The question is how. The bug report suggests to > manually do it in the postinst, is that a good idea? Yes, it is. If the maintainer script itself is no longer present in the package, then simply calling "update-rc.d gnocatan-meta-server remove" in the postinst on upgrade from an affected version should be sufficient. > I was thinking of adding an empty script so it will be removed at package > purge. That way I would be sure debhelper can do all its magic, and I > would be more sure that the Right Thing(tm) is done. Except that this is the *wrong* thing; you don't want empty scripts on the system, you don't want symlinks for a known dead service to be left around when upgrading to the dummy package. Debhelper is a *helper*, not a replacement for making sound decisions about creating proper packages. > What is the usual way to solve this situation? The usual solution is to not provide such dummy packages at all... :) -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.debian.org/
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
