Comment 18 for bug 19894

Message-ID: <email address hidden>
Date: Wed, 03 Aug 2005 13:50:44 +0200
From: =?iso-8859-1?q?Frank_K=FCster?= <email address hidden>
To: Florent Rougon <email address hidden>
Cc: <email address hidden>, Christoph Bier <email address hidden>
Subject: Re: Bug#320980: [Christoph Bier] Re: Bug#320980: tetex-bin: Updmap
 error because a map file has not been found

Florent Rougon <email address hidden> wrote:

> Frank K=FCster <email address hidden> wrote:
>
>> Maybe we have a design flaw here in our updmap-magic scheme. Just that
>> it should have revealed itself earlier.=20=20
>
> Nope. :)
>
>> Here, tetex-base, tetex-bin and tetex-extra are upgraded in the same
>> apt-get run, and they are configured in the order tetex-base, tetex-bin,
>> tetex-extra. Therefore, when tetex-bin is configured, the new conffiles
>> of tetex-extra are still named $conffile.dpkg-new, but the files in
>> /var/lib/tex-common/* are already there. No wonder updmap cannot find
>> $conffile; but why didn't this ocurr earlier?
>
> If $conffile is a conffile, since our Policy recommends .cfg files in
> /etc/texmf/updmap.d to also be conffiles, $conffile and the conffile in
> /etc/texmf/updmap.d that declares it should be simultaneously existent
> or non-existent whenever update-updmap is run (because they should be
> shipped in the same .deb).

Thanks - meanwhile, both by thinking and testing, I came to the same
conclusion.

> Maybe if you manage files in /etc/texmf/updmap.d with ucf, problems can
> arise... I didn't consider this scenario.

Then you have to take care for the right order of the changes. No,
Christoph's problem is a different one. I suspect it might be #321074 -
new upload is under way.

Regards, Frank
--=20
Frank K=FCster
Inst. f. Biochemie der Univ. Z=FCrich
Debian Developer