Your message dated Sat, 3 Nov 2012 09:01:50 +0100 with message-id <[email protected]> and subject line Re: Bug#677146: python-uno uses unopkg from libreoffice-common in preinst without declaring Pre-Depends has caused the Debian Bug report #677146, regarding python-uno uses unopkg from libreoffice-common in preinst without declaring Pre-Depends 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.) -- 677146: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=677146 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact [email protected] with problems
--- Begin Message ---Package: python-uno Version: 1:3.5.3-5 Severity: serious Justification: Policy 7.2 during an upgrade, the python-uno preinst script calls: /usr/lib/libreoffice/program/unopkg This file seems to come from the libreoffice-core pacakge. According to the policy: "Pre-Depends are also required if the preinst script depends on the named package" I found this when helping someone that was having trouble upgrading from squeeze to wheezy and was getting a preinst failure due to this file being missing. stew -- System Information: Debian Release: wheezy/sid APT prefers unstable APT policy: (500, 'unstable'), (500, 'testing'), (1, 'experimental') Architecture: amd64 (x86_64) Kernel: Linux 3.2.0-2-amd64 (SMP w/4 CPU cores) Locale: LANG=en_US.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=en_US.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8) Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/dash Versions of packages python-uno depends on: ii libc6 2.13-32 ii libgcc1 1:4.7.0-10 ii libpython2.7 2.7.3~rc2-2.1 ii libreoffice-core 1:3.5.3-5 ii libstdc++6 4.7.0-10 ii python 2.7.2-10 ii python2.7 2.7.3~rc2-2.1 ii uno-libs3 3.5.3-5 ii ure 3.5.3-5 python-uno recommends no packages. python-uno suggests no packages. -- no debconf information
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---On Sat, Nov 03, 2012 at 01:59:09AM -0400, Michael Gilbert wrote: > A lot going on in this bug report, but after a cursory look, it seems > that unstable would still be affected, and being an rc bug, I'm > reopening to appropriately track it as an unfixed issue there. And I clearly said that this "bug" is theoretical and that the script checks whether unopkg was functional before using it. Which is the normal case for stuff like this. *Seems* is not something we should do here. Show me a real problem and you can reopen this bug. Until then - closing again. (And thanks for fixing the "found" again which you removed to your reopen instead of "found".) Regards, Rene
--- End Message ---
