Steve Langasek <vor...@debian.org> writes:
> On Sun, Aug 15, 2010 at 12:25:19PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:

>> I believe they can be in the same state as the pre-dependency itself
>> for exactly the same reasons, no?  Upgrades don't require deconfiguring
>> packages that depend on the package being upgraded, so if you abort in
>> the middle of upgrading a package the pre-dependency depends on, the
>> pre-dependency is still present and configured on the system, so dpkg
>> will treat the pre-dependency as satisfied.

> The question is, if you upgrade a package which is a pre-dependency of
> another package, are any *new* dependencies of that package guaranteed
> to be unpacked before the package itself is?

> This seems like a sensible thing for the package manager to enforce, but
> I don't know if anything does so in practice.

I think I've lost track of all the packages here and am not entirely sure
what you're describing, but regardless we should probably move this part
of things into #593177, which is specifically about this.

> s/desirable/wanted/?

> and s/dependend/depended/ :)

> Seems ok to me.  Better than Jonathan's proposed wording, which doesn't
> read well because there's too much repetition.

> I might also add at the end:

>   In such situations, the depended-on package should perform an equivalent
>   clean-up operation if it's the first package to be removed or purged.

> But that may not be unambiguous enough to add any value here and I can't
> be bothered to further tune the language right now; I don't think that's
> a blocker and this bug has run quite long enough already.

I'm going to bail on that because of the length of the bug; I'd really
like to get this merged, since it's blocking resolving a few other bugs
that touch the same areas of wording.

I think it does read slightly better as two paragraphs.  Here's what I
have now:

              <p>
                The <tt>Depends</tt> field should also be used if the
                <prgn>postinst</prgn> or <prgn>prerm</prgn> scripts
                require the depended-on package to be unpacked or
                configured in order to run.  In the case of <tt>postinst
                configure</tt>, the depended-on packages will be unpacked
                and configured first.  (If both packages are involved in a
                dependency loop, this might not work as expected; see the
                explanation a few paragraphs back.)  In the case
                of <prgn>prerm</prgn> or other <prgn>postinst</prgn>
                actions, the package dependencies will normally be at
                least unpacked, but they may be only "Half-Installed" if a
                previous upgrade of the dependency failed.
              </p>

              <p>
                Finally, the <tt>Depends</tt> field should be used if the
                depended-on package is needed by the <prgn>postrm</prgn>
                script to fully clean up after the package removal.  There
                is no guarantee that package dependencies will be
                available when <prgn>postrm</prgn> is run, but the
                depended-on package is more likely to be available if the
                package declares a dependency (particularly in the case
                of <tt>postrm remove</tt>).  The <prgn>postrm</prgn>
                script must gracefully skip actions that require a
                dependency if that dependency isn't available.
              </p>

Does that look okay?

-- 
Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org)               <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-dpkg-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/87vd77dabo....@windlord.stanford.edu

Reply via email to