Previously Julian Gilbey wrote: > 7.2 Binary dependencies > This section states that "All but Pre-Depends and Conflicts take > effect only when a package is to be configured." But actually, > dpkg appears to ignore everything except for (Pre-)Depends, > (sometimes) Recommends and Conflicts. So what should this say?
It should say what it currently says. > 7.2 Depends: should also mention "or if it is required by the > postinst, prerm or postrm scripts". Remove postrm from there, that can't rely on the Depends being present. > 7.5 States: > Virtual packages (Section 7.4, `Virtual packages - `Provides'') are > not considered when looking at a `Replaces' field - the packages > declared as being replaced must be mentioned by their real names. > But does it in a Provides/Conflicts/Replaces scenario, as > described in 7.5.2? P/C/R is really a special case. > 7.5.1 States: > In the future `dpkg' will discard files which would overwrite those > from an already installed package which declares that it replaces the > package being installed. This is so that you can install an older > version of a package without problems. > Has this now happened? What do you mean? This has always been true. > > Chapter 9 > Should mention that ld.so might actually be ld-linux.so or > something else instead. It could be anything basically, especially if you start thinking about Debian GNU/HURD or BSD versions. > 9.2.2 Should say what dpkg-shlibdeps actually does if we're going to > say anything at all. The footnote should be zapped and the merged into the real text. What it says won't be entirely correct either once I replace dpkg-shlibdeps with the python versions. > 9.2.* Do we need /etc/dpkg/shlibs.default any longer? Yes. > 10.1.2: Surely directories should be removed by postrm, not prerm? > (Prerm may not always be called, eg if a package disappears.) Either might happen. 10.3.1: needs to be rewritten for LSB complience which defines specific runlevels. > 10.3.2: Hard question: > Not all of start, stop, restart etc. are relevant for everything > in /etc/init.d, for example checkfs.sh. We should figure out a > way of distinguishing between daemons (which should accept all of > these) and specific startup/shutdown scripts (which needn't). Daemon or non-daemon is a really bad measure. > 10.3.2: Should "The start, stop, restart and force-reload options > should be supported" be replaced by "must be supported", > contingent on the above suggestion? I don't think force-relead must be supported, restart already does the same thing. The other three should be a must though. Wichert. -- ________________________________________________________________ / Generally uninteresting signature - ignore at your convenience \ | [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.liacs.nl/~wichert/ | | 1024D/2FA3BC2D 576E 100B 518D 2F16 36B0 2805 3CB8 9250 2FA3 BC2D |
