On Sun, Mar 04, 2007 at 02:02:40AM +0100, Julien Cristau wrote: > On Sun, Mar 4, 2007 at 00:41:16 +0100, Bill Allombert wrote: > > > On Sun, Mar 04, 2007 at 12:15:40AM +0100, Julien Cristau wrote: > > > Do you have any idea where hanterm comes from? > > > > Yes, it comes from hanterm-classic and/or hanterm-xf (there is an > > alternative) > > > > # ls -l /usr/X11R6/bin/ > > -rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 6001 Apr 21 2003 hamsoft > > lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 25 Mar 3 21:03 hanterm -> > > /etc/alternatives/hanterm > > > > # ls -l /etc/alternatives/hanterm > > lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 28 Mar 3 21:03 /etc/alternatives/hanterm -> > > /usr/bin/X11/hanterm-classic > > > x11-common already conflicts with earlier versions of these packages, so > I'm not sure what else we can do on the X side. > hanterm-classic is not in etch, so nothing we can do there either. > However it seems that hanterm-xf in etch still installs its alternative > in /usr/bin/X11, which I guess can cause problems if it is configured > before x11-common is unpacked. > I don't really understand how only the symlink is still in > /usr/X11R6/bin in your upgrade scenario, though, could it be a bug in > hanterm-classic's prerm, which doesn't remove the alternative cleanly?
The issue seems that it installs the alternative in /usr/bin/X11/ not in /usr/X11R6/bin/. Cheers, -- Bill. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Imagine a large blue swirl here. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
