On Sep 12, Horms <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I tried to reproduce this by upgrading from 0.056-3 (testing) to > 0.068-2 (unstable), but the problem did not manifest. I think Because 0.056-3 is the second release which provides a permissions.rules file, so you did not test the upgrade procedure (but still, I see no reason why it should fail). But are you sure that you had a version older than the one in stable/testing installed before you upgraded and experienced the problem? If you had not it means that permissions.rules was already installed by the 0.056-2 or 0.056-3 upgrade.
> Perhaps the postint would be less fragile to failure if it > only added the symlinks if they didn't exist individually, > rather than aborting if any of them exist. Or perhaps prompting > the user. No, this is a design choice: the package never tries to modify a configuration modified by the local admin, unless a new file is introduced. -- ciao, Marco
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
