On Tue, Jan 11, 2005 at 05:44:26PM +0100, Wouter Verhelst wrote: > Op di, 11-01-2005 te 17:39 +0100, schreef Richard Atterer: > > On Tue, Jan 11, 2005 at 05:10:23PM +0100, Bill Allombert wrote: > > > So what would you advise me to do ? > > > > Why don't you ship a dummy "update-menus" command? In the unpacked package, > > the command could be a shell script which does nothing. The postinst could > > then replace that script with the correct binary. > > Because that would break other packages.
Could you elaborate ? I don't think that would break anything. > What I'm really wondering about, though, is why you need to ship it that > way. I thought dpkg shipped packages in dependency order, if possible; > doesn't it? I am not sure I understand what you mean by 'dpkg shipped' but the issue is that packages providing menu entries call update-menus in their maintainer scripts but do not depend on menu, so the state of menu is undefined at this stage (maintainer scripts can be executed at any time). Cheers, -- Bill. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Imagine a large red swirl here. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]