Tiago Bortoletto Vaz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Due to the "command-with-path-in-maintainer-script postrm:5
> /usr/bin/ucf" lintian warning I considered useless testing if ucf is
> there. I mean, if I can't call ucf by using its default system path, why
> do I have to check it? (it is a real question actually - not sure about
> my decision here)
The theory is that you're supposed to use a construct like:
if which ucf >/dev/null 2>&1 ;
# do ucf things
fi
--
Russ Allbery ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
