On Sat, 05 Jul 2008, Russ Allbery wrote:
Please check the following patch, which attempts to clarify how dpkg
diversions should be handled. Once I started digging into this, the cases
looked more complex than I had expected. I tried to add more language to
explain the whole situation on the
Thanks for the review!
Raphael Hertzog [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Sat, 05 Jul 2008, Russ Allbery wrote:
The postrm has to do the reverse:
example
- if [ remove = $1 ]; then
+ if [ remove = $1 -o abort-install = $1 -o disappear = $1 ]; then
To be really complete we should
On Sun, 06 Jul 2008, Russ Allbery wrote:
Since this is Policy (even an appendix), and since the failure case is
what people most frequently get wrong, I think I'd like to try to capture
the whole situation. Do you think that something like this is more
confusing than it's worth? I think it
Please check the following patch, which attempts to clarify how dpkg
diversions should be handled. Once I started digging into this, the cases
looked more complex than I had expected. I tried to add more language to
explain the whole situation on the grounds that if I found it confusing,
other
4 matches
Mail list logo
