Your message dated Sun, 8 Feb 2009 22:06:55 +0100
with message-id <20090208210655.ga29...@rivendell>
and subject line Re: Bug#239489: dpkg: rejecting --slave for --remove is a bad
idea
has caused the Debian Bug report #239489,
regarding [U-A] rejecting --slave for --remove is a bad idea
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.
(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact [email protected]
immediately.)
--
239489: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=239489
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact [email protected] with problems
--- Begin Message ---
Package: dpkg
Version: 1.10.19
Severity: normal
Several packages in woody use
update-alternatives --remove foo bar --slave baz bimp bong
This now causes the following error:
update-alternatives: --slave only allowed with --install
While I agree conceptually that this makes sense, and strictly speaking
a bug in the packages, enforcing it breaks upgrades fairly severely. I
suggest either ignoring the --slave arguments, or complaining only if
they are inconsistent with what's actually there.
Steve
-- System Information
Debian Release: 3.0
Architecture: i386
Kernel: Linux zero 2.4.18-686 #2 Wed Mar 20 20:21:31 EST 2002 i686
Locale: LANG=C, LC_CTYPE=C
Versions of packages dpkg depends on:
ii dselect 1.10.19 a user tool to manage Debian packa
ii libc6 2.3.2.ds1-11 GNU C Library: Shared libraries an
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
On Mon, 22 Mar 2004, Steve Greenland wrote:
> Several packages in woody use
> update-alternatives --remove foo bar --slave baz bimp bong
>
> This now causes the following error:
> update-alternatives: --slave only allowed with --install
>
> While I agree conceptually that this makes sense, and strictly speaking
> a bug in the packages, enforcing it breaks upgrades fairly severely. I
> suggest either ignoring the --slave arguments, or complaining only if
> they are inconsistent with what's actually there.
We're now in 2009 (5 years later) and all problematic cases have certainly
been fixed by now. Changing this now doesn't make any sense, hence I'm
closing it.
Cheers,
--
Raphaël Hertzog
Le best-seller français mis à jour pour Debian Etch :
http://www.ouaza.com/livre/admin-debian/
--- End Message ---
