On Fri, 2009-11-27 at 21:09:57 +0200, Eugene V. Lyubimkin wrote: > Guillem Jover wrote: > > Something like this could do (on a clean lenny chroot): > > > > r...@gaara:~# export LC_ALL=C > > r...@gaara:~# dpkg --auto-deconfigure --unpack libc-bin_2.10.2-2_amd64.deb > > This: > > a) may break the planned changeset by allowing dpkg to do unwanted actions;
This is already the case, dpkg might disappear a package in some situations, and the front-ends should be able to cope with those cases, that's why those events are reported via the status-fd pipe. > b) is package(libc)-specific and not generic solution, because the action > sequence proposed in the first message of the thread will probably work > flawlessly for almost all other packages, it's only dpkg is "smart" enough to > break the upgrade with no actual reason, and the front-end has no way to > predict it. Always using --auto-deconfigure should be safe, and is the generic solution. Your “flawless” solution involves several force options, making files unavaiable from the file system for a time window, that could be not short if there was an error during the transaction that made dpkg exit, it's certainly not the correct solution. And this case can be spotted easily when a package replaces another one and that other breaks this first, the replacing one should always be installed first, otherwise the system will end up with missing files for a period of time. Also your continuous use of force options in cupt leaves to be desired (just saw the new --force-bad-path), pointing as excuse a breakage in dpkg when it seemed pretty clear the ordering chosen was wrong, and can leave the system in a broken state. Not to mention as I've said several times already that apt manages to handle all those situations with *no* force option at all. regards, guillem -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
