Hi Guillem, On 07/22/15 15:19, Guillem Jover wrote: >> >> If dpkg is unreliable, then what are the package signatures good for? > > I'm not sure which package signatures you're talking about. But, no, this > is very old “expected” behavior, it's documented both in the dpkg FAQ: >
I can assure you that this is not expected. Instead of a symlink there was an empty directory, breaking the development environment on some of our build hosts. > > <https://wiki.debian.org/Teams/Dpkg/FAQ#Q:_Will_dpkg_replace_a_symlink_with_a_directory_or_vice_versa.3F> > If I got this right, then not taking care of the previous /usr/include/asm directory it is a serious bug in gcc-multilib. It should have provided a preinst script for that. Is this correct? Regards Harri -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected]
