Bug#269573: [Pkg-shadow-devel] Processed: Re: removal problem (remove-shell in postrm script)
OK, we'll try to sort out this issue. And, btw, Matthias, in name of shadow package maintainers, I think you deserve a small apology for the Bullshit remark by Alexander. I think it was probably a bit exxagerated and I'd like we talk about this issue quietly and friendly even if we don't agree (which I don't know at this moment). OK, I again went around this issue and read the whole bug log. The main point seems to be that Alexander (and Nicolas François as well) mentioned that the issue can be solved by moving the code using remove-shell in bash postrm to bash *prerm*. However, later in the bug log, and in his reassignment message, Matthias says even if a shell's postrm is a C program, it needs to deregister the shell. You basically argue, because remove-shell has a deficiency (the implementation as a shell script), every shell should add a workaround for that deficiency? I don't get it. I understand this as moving the code to the prerm would be a workaround. However, a quick look at some other shell packages postrm scripts (namely dash and pdksh) showed me that they usually call remove-shell in their prerm scripts. So, at first look there does not seem to be an established policy to call remove-shell in postrm. So, is there actually some reason, not mentioned in this bug log, for the remove-shell code to be in postrm ?
Bug#269573: [Pkg-shadow-devel] Processed: Re: removal problem (remove-shell in postrm script)
Christian Perrier writes: However, later in the bug log, and in his reassignment message, Matthias says even if a shell's postrm is a C program, it needs to deregister the shell. You basically argue, because remove-shell has a deficiency (the implementation as a shell script), every shell should add a workaround for that deficiency? I don't get it. I understand this as moving the code to the prerm would be a workaround. However, a quick look at some other shell packages postrm scripts (namely dash and pdksh) showed me that they usually call remove-shell in their prerm scripts. well, zsh does remove it in the postrm. So, at first look there does not seem to be an established policy to call remove-shell in postrm. So, is there actually some reason, not mentioned in this bug log, for the remove-shell code to be in postrm ? If the prerm fails, you have to make sure, that add-shell is called again in the appropriate place. Yes, I consider this as a workaround, if I'm not able to call remove-shell from the postrm.
Bug#269573: [Pkg-shadow-devel] Processed: Re: removal problem (remove-shell in postrm script)
Quoting Debian Bug Tracking System ([EMAIL PROTECTED]): Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: reassign 269573 passwd Bug#269573: removal problem (postrm script) Bug reassigned from package `bash' to `passwd'. OK, we'll try to sort out this issue. And, btw, Matthias, in name of shadow package maintainers, I think you deserve a small apology for the Bullshit remark by Alexander. I think it was probably a bit exxagerated and I'd like we talk about this issue quietly and friendly even if we don't agree (which I don't know at this moment). -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
