Can we please get some consistent, agreed-upon, publicly-available
rules for how update-alternatives should be implemented?
In August there was an extensive thread where we were told repeatedly
that the --remove part should go in %preun. All the packages I was
working with were in %postun, but I changed them all to %preun as I
was told. Now, I have had three packages rejected for putting
--remove in %preun, telling me it has to go in %postun instead.
Assuming this rejection is even correct, I now have dozens of packages
where I have to revert the change I was told to make just a few weeks
There are no published policies for update-alternatives. All we have
to go on is one extremely simple example that doesn't represent the
situation of most packages and we are just supposed to figure out how
to apply it to our particular situation. Worse, that example uses
%postun for one subpackage and %preun for another with no explanation
of which we should use under what situations.
We really need some specific, detailed rules and guidelines for
exactly how we need to implement update-alternatives. Rejecting
packages for complying with instructions in the mailing list is a huge
waste of everyones' time.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+owner(a)opensuse.org
Show replies by date