XPost: linux.debian.bugs.dist, linux.debian.policy
From:
jak@debian.org
Package: debian-policy
Severity: wishlist
X-Debbugs-Cc:
deity@lists.debian.org,
debian-dpkg@lists.debian.org
APT's installation planner does not consider dependencies of packages
being scheduled for removal, so a prerm must fail equally gracefully
as a postrm does in absence of its dependencies.
This does break dpkg's assumptions which it happily tells you about,
but this is the reality we live in.
So e.g. one thing you see is that apt removes libapt-pkg6.0, then
unpacks libapt-pkg6.0t64, then removes libapt-pkg6.0 reverse
dependencies.
Clearly APT should be considering dependencies when removing packages
but even in that case, removals may sometimes need to be forced in the
wrong order because any order leads to broken dependencies, so still,
prerms should not rely on dependencies, but only on essential packages.
--
debian developer - deb.li/jak | jak-linux.org - free software dev
ubuntu core developer i speak de, en
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)