Tim, Tim> Thanks for looking into this.
Well, that's what we're here for ;-) Tim> You are correct that my system is Debian 1.3. I went to Tim> "http://www.debian.org/packages.html";, did a search for tob, found Tim> tob_0.14-4 at Tim> "http://cgi.debian.org/www-master/debian.org/Packages/unstable/utils/tob.html";, ^^^^^^^^ Tim> downloaded and installed it. You searched under 'unstable'. You should have searched under 'stable' (ie selected the radio button for it) as 'stable' corresponds to Debian 1.3. That would have lead you to tob_0.14-2 which is part of Debian 1.3 CD. Tim> No mention is made on the web page or from "dpkg --info Tim> tob_0.14-4.deb" of any package or Debian version (hamm or bo) Tim> dependencies, and it installs without error or warning messages. Well, for binary packages, the dependency on libc6 ensures that you don't mix libc5 (Debian 1.3) and libc6 (Debian 2.0). As Joey Hess just pointed out, binary-all packages as tob need an explicit dependency. So I just made tob_0.14-6 which I am uploading as we speak. Tim> So my question(s) would be: Tim> Tim> 1. How is one to know that a hamm system is required for this package? It's implicit as you took it from the 'unstable' tree. Tim> 2. I notice there is currently no mention of bug#21412 in the Tim> bug-tracking system. Will this bug be considered closed? Yes, I closed it via a mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] You can reopen it [ who shouldn't, see below ], see the documentation in the debian/doc directory on the mirror sites, or in /usr/doc/debian/ if you have the 'doc-debian' package installed. Tim> My view would be that it should be considered Severity:Critical, the Tim> bug report should stay open indefinetly and/or tob_0.14-4 should be Tim> completely removed from all Debian sites. After all, the next "bo" Tim> user that installs this risks taking out their entire system. Please chill out a little and read the emails you got yesterday. I released tob_0.14-5 yesterday which added the following test cleanup () { message 'Cleaning up.' # add a safety check here --edd 20 Apr 98, regarding #21412 -----> if [ "$TMPLIST" != "" -a "$FILELIST" != "" ] ; then $RM -f $TMPLIST* $FILELIST* fi postcommand } which already prevents the behaviour you experienced. That version was installed last night into the archive. This means that 0.14-4 is gone. Vanished. Nothing left. [ It's still in the mirrors, but no longer on master.debian.org and will be replaced in the mirrors. ] Are you happy ? Further, and as I just said, I adopted a better fix upon a suggestion from a fellow developer and made tob depend explicitly on debianutils. Ie you cannot run it without having debianutils installed. I am sorry for the grieve that the package caused you. In retrospect, I should have added the dependency on debianutils in tob_0.14-4 when tempfile was added for safer creation of temporary files. However, we use the 'unstable' release to iron such bugs out. You helped us in finding the bug, and hence helped other users from being bitten by it. Thanks ! Regards, Dirk -- mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] According to the latest official figures, http://rosebud.ml.org/~edd 43% of all statistics are totally worthless. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
