On Fri, May 12, 2006 at 05:13:29PM -0500, Frank Lichtenheld wrote: > On Fri, May 12, 2006 at 01:49:32PM -0500, Frank Lichtenheld wrote: > > I have an alternative patch that at least fixes the defoma/ttf-bitstream > > case. I haven't tested all the other packages yet. Comments and > > testing welcome. > > Cases that this patch doesn't fix include openssl/ca-certificates > and tex-common/tetex-base. It only works if all the files in question > are conffiles, not configuration files. > > The problem is that I'm not sure what dpkg is supposed to do in > case of the configuration files...
I have read and tested your patch of Fri, 12 May 2006 22:38:56 -0500. I confirm that it fixes the problem for defoma/ttf-bitstream-vera and that it does not fix the problem for openssl/ca-certificates. I don't see this patch cause regression. To fix openssl/ca-certificates the only way I see is to keep /etc/ssl/certs and /etc/ssl in /var/lib/dpkg/info/ca-certificates.list until ca-certificates is "purge"d, because I see no sensible way to make dpkg know what happens in scripts like postrm. I suggest to use my patch of Mon, 16 Jan 2006 00:45:40 +0100. That patch fixes all known cases so far, including defoma/ttf-bitstream-vera and openssl/ca-certificates. That patch does make some directories to be deleted a bit later (discussed before), but I see no way to avoid that, see above about postrm. My patch of Sun, 5 Feb 2006 13:01:57 +0100 is a variation, but I realize now that it makes the solution incomplete at some point(s), so let's forget about that patch. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
