On Mon, Dec 18, 2006 at 06:41:41PM +0100, Frank Küster wrote: > Package: debian-policy > Version: 3.7.2.1 > Severity: normal > Tags: patch
> Current Policy says: > ,---- 7.2 Binary Dependencies > | The Depends field should also be used if the postinst, prerm or > | postrm scripts require the package to be present in order to > | run. Note, however, that the postrm cannot rely on any > | non-essential packages to be present during the purge phase. > `---- > I suggest to add to the second sentence: ", and that only the postinst > script can rely on the package to be configured." > I'm not even sure whether the postinst can rely on "configuredness" for > all types of incovation, or only for "configure"/"reconfigure". > For an example why this difference is important, see #403641 I don't think this is the right solution. Putting the burden on package prerms to deal with brokenness in their dependencies' postinsts is rather onerous; I think we need to acknowledge here that it's possible for packages to end up in a state that can't be resolved automatically, but only as a consequence of bugs/failures in their dependencies. -- 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/
