Florent Rougon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Frank Küster <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> Maybe we have a design flaw here in our updmap-magic scheme. Just that >> it should have revealed itself earlier. > > Nope. :) > >> Here, tetex-base, tetex-bin and tetex-extra are upgraded in the same >> apt-get run, and they are configured in the order tetex-base, tetex-bin, >> tetex-extra. Therefore, when tetex-bin is configured, the new conffiles >> of tetex-extra are still named $conffile.dpkg-new, but the files in >> /var/lib/tex-common/* are already there. No wonder updmap cannot find >> $conffile; but why didn't this ocurr earlier? > > If $conffile is a conffile, since our Policy recommends .cfg files in > /etc/texmf/updmap.d to also be conffiles, $conffile and the conffile in > /etc/texmf/updmap.d that declares it should be simultaneously existent > or non-existent whenever update-updmap is run (because they should be > shipped in the same .deb).
Thanks - meanwhile, both by thinking and testing, I came to the same conclusion. > Maybe if you manage files in /etc/texmf/updmap.d with ucf, problems can > arise... I didn't consider this scenario. Then you have to take care for the right order of the changes. No, Christoph's problem is a different one. I suspect it might be #321074 - new upload is under way. Regards, Frank -- Frank Küster Inst. f. Biochemie der Univ. Zürich Debian Developer
