On 2008-06-18 13:45 +0200, Raphael Hertzog wrote: > On Mon, 02 Jun 2008, Russ Allbery wrote: >> And, actually, should we just remove the if or case guard entirely and >> just run dpkg-divert unconditionally in preinst? The only difference at >> that point is abort-upgrade, and if the new version of the package was >> removing diversions in its preinst, re-establishing the diversion is the >> right thing to do. I'm remembering Ian's previous comments that normally >> one should not be testing the action in maintainer scripts. > > I tend to agree, I can't imagine a scenario where it would be a bad thing > to do. > > But we certainly don't want to temporarily remove the diversion on upgrade > so this is ok only for the preinst part. The postrm part shall stay > restricted to the "remove" case.
For the record, running it in the "upgrade" case cannot work at all, because the new preinst is run _before_ the old postrm. See #486446 for an example. Sven -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]