On Mon, Sep 08, 2003 at 01:08:34PM +0200, Mathieu Roy wrote: > Colin Watson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> a tapot? : > > On Mon, Sep 08, 2003 at 09:35:45AM +0200, Mathieu Roy wrote: > > > Would it be acceptable to fill a bug against each installer that do > > > not build a proper debian package when installing non-free software? > > > > How can they do so? Installing a package with 'dpkg -i' in the postinst > > of another package isn't possible, since dpkg's status area is locked. > > At this point, the question is not how to do it
I think it absolutely is. If something is impossible to do correctly then filing [1] bugs against packages claiming that they don't do it is rather unfair. [1] P.S. When talking about bugs the verb is "file", not "fill", and "filing", not "filling". This seems to be a common mistake. > (anyway, I think there are several way to do it, it's not a big deal). OK. How does one create an installer package which correctly does the following: * creates a Debian package for the thing it's installing * installs that package in such a way that it's registered in dpkg's database * doesn't rely on internal implementation details of dpkg such as /var/lib/dpkg/status and /var/lib/dpkg/info/*.list files * when the installer package is considered by dpkg as fully configured, the package it's installing is also fully configured * if some error happens when installing the created package, the installer package will throw an error during configuration ? I think that's a minimal specification for a correct installer package which does its work by creating Debian packages; unless you think that it's better for the installer package to spit out a .deb somewhere which you then have to install separately, which seems to me like a step backwards in convenience. Cheers, -- Colin Watson [EMAIL PROTECTED]