Hi, On Fri, 04 May 2012, Marc Haber wrote: > in dpkg-maintscript-helper's rm_conffile function, the code goes to > lengths to set the PACKAGE variable correctly, but the debug output > "Executing $0 rm_conffile ..." still refers to > DPKG_MAINTSCRIPT_PACKAGE which may not be set. PACKAGE, however, seems > to be correct in more cases.
Well, we already require DPKG_MAINTSCRIPT_NAME and it's rather unlikely that one would manually set DPKG_MAINTSCRIPT_NAME but not DPKG_MAINTSCRIPT_PACKAGE. Even debconf, which used to not set those variables at all, is now correctly setting them. So I really don't see in what situation DPKG_MAINTSCRIPT_PACKAGE would not be set. DPKG_MAINTSCRIPT_PACKAGE provides a fallback value for PACKAGE and not the other way around. It might be possible that one would use rm_conffile to remove a file owned by another binary package of the same source (although I don't see the use case for this, maybe cleaning up for a removed but not purged binary package that got dropped) in which case the debug message would become misleading. > I am therefore wondering whether the debug output shouldn't be > referring to PACKAGE instead of DPKG_MAINTSCRIPT_PACKAGE. I don't think so. Furthermore the value of PACKAGE is output on the line afterwards anyway. If you agree with my answer, please close the bug. Cheers, -- Raphaël Hertzog ◈ Debian Developer Pre-order a copy of the Debian Administrator's Handbook and help liberate it: http://debian-handbook.info/liberation/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected]
