On Sat, Aug 31, 2013 at 02:50:29AM +0200, Christoph Anton Mitterer wrote: > Package: libxml-libxml-perl > Version: 2.0010+dfsg-1+b1 > Severity: normal
> These errors appeared on upgrading: > Preparing to replace libxml-libxml-perl 2.0010+dfsg-1 (using > .../libxml-libxml-perl_2.0010+dfsg-1+b1_amd64.deb) ... > Can't locate File/Basename.pm in @INC (you may need to install the > File::Basename module) (@INC contains: /etc/perl /usr/local/lib/perl/5.18.1 > /usr/local/share/perl/5.18.1 /usr/lib/perl5 /usr/share/perl5 > /usr/lib/perl/5.18 /usr/share/perl/5.18 /usr/local/lib/site_perl .) at > /usr/share/perl5/XML/SAX.pm line 15. > BEGIN failed--compilation aborted at /usr/share/perl5/XML/SAX.pm line 15. > Compilation failed in require at /usr/bin/update-perl-sax-parsers line 18. > BEGIN failed--compilation aborted at /usr/bin/update-perl-sax-parsers line 18. > dpkg: warning: subprocess old pre-removal script returned error exit status 2 > dpkg: trying script from the new package instead ... > dpkg: ... it looks like that went OK The issue is 'old-prerm upgrade' relying on non-essential functionality. I don't think it is explicitly spelled out in the policy, but in practice it just doesn't work. However, I believe this case is mostly cosmetic as 'new-prerm failed-upgrade old-version' succeeds so the upgrade doesn't break. It's possible that the resulting list of SAX parsers is not quite right, but IIRC I tested this at some point and didn't see any serious breakage. The situation around update-perl-sax-parsers is clearly a mess, and I think we have accumulated quite a few other related bugs over the years. While I do feel some guilt over my involvement in the setup, I sorely lack the motivation to properly fix it myself. -- Niko Tyni [email protected] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected]
