Message-ID: <email address hidden>
Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2005 12:28:52 +0200
From: Loic Minier <email address hidden>
To: Ryan Murray <email address hidden>, <email address hidden>
Subject: Re: Bug#329759: unfixed
On Mon, Oct 17, 2005, Ryan Murray wrote:
> Sorry, but depending on gconf2 does not fix this. The prerm script nee=
ds to
> not fail if gconf2 is unavailable.
Can you -vv your remark? You want the dh_gconf to be more robust?
Policy seems to grant explicitely this usage:
The Depends field should also be used if the postinst, prerm or
postrm scripts require the package to be present in order to run.
Note, however, that the postrm cannot rely on any non-essential
packages to be present during the purge phase.
Message-ID: <email address hidden>
Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2005 12:28:52 +0200
From: Loic Minier <email address hidden>
To: Ryan Murray <email address hidden>, <email address hidden>
Subject: Re: Bug#329759: unfixed
On Mon, Oct 17, 2005, Ryan Murray wrote:
> Sorry, but depending on gconf2 does not fix this. The prerm script nee=
ds to
> not fail if gconf2 is unavailable.
Can you -vv your remark? You want the dh_gconf to be more robust?
Policy seems to grant explicitely this usage:
The Depends field should also be used if the postinst, prerm or
postrm scripts require the package to be present in order to run.
Note, however, that the postrm cannot rely on any non-essential
packages to be present during the purge phase.
--=20
Lo=EFc Minier <email address hidden>