Observations: 1. Hiding /usr/local/bin/install-info (which was the old GNU texinfo, v 4.8) enabled aptitude to finish cleanly.
2. Package management software operating in vendor (in this Ubuntu) territory, i.e., using the vendor's package database, should insulate itself from PATH components not under vendor control, e.g., /home/abigail/bin, /usr/local/sbin, and /usr/local/bin. Maybe, in fact, the distribution copy of root's .profile should explicitly set the PATH for root so that it does not depend on a default that may (or may not) be hard-wired into root's shell. (This, however, would not cover the case of package operations by a desktop installation's non-root administrative user.) 3. I first learned about info hypertext in 1989. By the early 1990's I was using GNU Texinfo's "install-info" on Suns. IMO this name should belong to GNU. Variants or fronts for package management should have different names, e.g., dpkg-install-info. 4. Is there justification for the complaint by /usr/sbin/install-info that it should not be called with a full pathname? -- installation of emacs23 blocked by emacsen-common https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/623588 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
