Hi, On Sat, Jun 23, 2012 at 06:23:21PM +0200, Helmut Grohne wrote: > On Sat, Jun 23, 2012 at 10:29:29PM +0900, Osamu Aoki wrote: > > This is non-essential but I thought it may be good idea not to make
Obviously s/not to/to/ > > postinst script robust. As it is written now, any non-zero exit code of > > update-catalog will break postinst script. > > This is somewhat intentional. If update-catalog breaks, then something > really is broken and should fail loudly. > > > Why not like: > > update-catalog --quiet --update-super || > > echo "SGML catalog is broken. Read > > /usr/share/doc/sgml-base/README.trouble." 1>&2 > > This would hide failures to write the super catalog and cause very nasty > failures as we have seen in the past. So you mean --quiet and error exit is good? I see. I still worry about being too quiet to hide source of the trouble. Do you think we need update-catalog --quiet --update-super || update-catalog --update-super If --quiet gives good enough indication of error, we do not need this. I have not checked.... Maybe I am too worried with no reason. If you think this is OK, no problem with me. > > FYI: I did not understand why this script returns > > * 1=error for normal errors, > > * 0=non-error for goods and > > * -1=error (for shell this 255) for --help and --version. > > The last type was not expected. > > I think that update-catalog never had a useful distinction between 1 and > -1. For instance it runs into both printing a usage sometimes. (--help > causes -1, --doesnotexist causes 1) Note that a "die" results in -1. > > What kind of failures are "normal errors"? Which failures would you like > not to be loud? I have no idea. That is why I marked FYI. Maybe non-essential variation. Osamu -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
