On Sat, Sep 27, 2008 at 06:57:23PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote: > Tiago Bortoletto Vaz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > Due to the "command-with-path-in-maintainer-script postrm:5 > > /usr/bin/ucf" lintian warning I considered useless testing if ucf is > > there. I mean, if I can't call ucf by using its default system path, why > > do I have to check it? (it is a real question actually - not sure about > > my decision here) > > The theory is that you're supposed to use a construct like: > > if which ucf >/dev/null 2>&1 ; > # do ucf things > fi
Ok, thanks. This suggested in ucf examples/postrm. My fault. I'll fix it and ask for a new unblock soon. Regards, -- Tiago Bortoletto Vaz http://tiagovaz.org 0xA504FECA - http://pgp.mit.edu GNU/Linux user #188687
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
