reopen 286549 thanks Manoj wrote: > Indeed, looking at the code, I see no basis for that > statement, so I am closing this report. Please reopen it if you can > demonstrate from dpkg source that policy is indeed incomplete.
I can demonstrate it by experiment. I created a dummy package foo with maintainer scripts that print their names and arguments. Version 2 of the package has a preinst that exits with status 1. Both new-postrm and old-postinst get called, in that order, with "abort-upgrade" as the first argument (and each other's version number as the second argument). Preparing to replace foo 1 (using .../foo_2_all.deb) ... /var/lib/dpkg/tmp.ci/preinst (new preinst) upgrade 1 dpkg: error processing /home/jdthood/tmp/foo_2_all.deb (--install): subprocess pre-installation script returned error exit status 1 /var/lib/dpkg/tmp.ci/postrm (new postrm) abort-upgrade 1 /var/lib/dpkg/info/foo.postinst (old postinst) abort-upgrade 2 Errors were encountered while processing: /home/jdthood/src/pkg-alsa/pkg-alsa/trunk/build-area/foo_2_all.deb -- Thomas Hood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
