Steve Langasek <vor...@debian.org> writes: > Therefore I think it's always wrong for a package's postinst to exit 0 if:
> - it ships a service, > - it is a new install or an upgrade on a system where the service was > previously started successfully, and > - the service fails to start in the postinst. An interesting problem case is a package whose point is to run a service, but which requires mandatory and not-automatable setup before the service can usefully run. After package installation, the service cannot start. So the options are either attempt to start the service as normal in the postinst but ignore the failure, or add some more complex logic to postinst to attempt to determine whether the service has been set up properly and only attempt to start the service if it has. I think our packaging system doesn't handle this case that well. I can make good arguments for several possible behavior choices. But obviously one cannot have package installation fail because the service cannot be started when the package has to be installed so that you can configure it so that the service can start. -- Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org) <https://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>
