Hi Joey! Thank you for your prompt reply.
On Fri, 13 Mar 2009 00:38:30 +0100, Joey Hess wrote: > Luca Capello wrote: >> subprocess post-installation script returned error exit status 127 >> Errors were encountered while processing: >> slime >> [master 3a1db55] committing changes in /etc after apt run >> 1 files changed, 35 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) >> create mode 100644 emacs/site-start.d/50slime.el >> E: Sub-process /usr/bin/dpkg returned an error code (1) > > The changes have been made by an apt run that etckeeper knows about, > even though it failed. So why should etckeeper not commit them? Well, I consider an apt-get run not just downloading the packages, but installing them successfully as well. In this case the slime package is not completely installed. I know this is maybe a corner case or, even worse, a very specific one, because slime cannot be removed either (again see bug #518021 [1], which I have fixed in the Debian VCS). And I think I understand your POV as well: slime files are indeed installed in /etc, thus it is "normal" that etckeeper commits them. This because apt-get is not "broken" and can just "ignore" the slime package failure and continue to installing other packages as well. Thus, the slime files will be committed anyway. Feel free to close the bug or tag it as wontfix, I do not think there is any "perfect" (or even "clearer") solution. Sorry for the noise. Thx, bye, Gismo / Luca Footnotes: [1] http://bugs.debian.org/518021
pgpqlgyZCQBlu.pgp
Description: PGP signature
