=== zequence_ is now known as zequence [18:06] superm1: *poke* [18:06] superm1: +DEB_HOST_ARCH=$(dpkg-architecture -qDEB_HOST_ARCH) [18:07] superm1: No can do in your postrm. dpkg-architecture is from dpkg-dev. I think what you were looking for was ${DPKG_MAINTSCRIPT_ARCH} [18:07] infinity: yeah? [18:07] superm1: Which is passed by dpkg to maintscripts based on the arch of the package. [18:07] Okay I'll fixxy up in an upload this afternoon [18:08] Thanks [18:09] superm1: (Even discounting the dpkg-dev issue, your solution would have been wrong because I can install fwupdate-signed:amd64 on an i386 system, for instance) [18:09] superm1: So, yeah. DPKG_MAINTSCRIPT_ARCH gets you the _$ARCH.deb arch, which is what you're actually after. [18:14] superm1: Erm, similar issue with your postrm calling lsb_release. [18:16] superm1: Perhaps bake the vendor in there with dpkg-vendor at build time, or just accept that Debian and Ubuntu will be forked for a little bit and hardcode the distro, or search both paths (which seems harmless) [18:17] superm1: I'd probably go for the latter, and just 'rm -f /boot/efi/EFI/ubuntu/fwup$EFI_NAME.efi /boot/efi/EFI/debian/fwup$EFI_NAME.efi' [18:18] superm1: And it looks like the package also needs a dep on lsb-release for the install script... But you might want to avoid that too. [18:27] infinity, it sounds slightly frightening to be removing things from debian ... you might have a dual boot debian/ubuntu [18:28] Oh, point. [18:28] Then it makes more sense to bake the distro into the maintainer scripts with dpkg-vendor at build time, IMO, so you *know* where the package came from and what it expects to install. [18:28] Ditto with the install script, since it should match the postrm. [18:29] superm1: ^ [18:30] infinity: OK baking it in won't be a problem, thanks apw [19:34] infinity: ^ that should handle your comments in both packages [19:40] superm1: You missed the updated build-dep on -signed. :) [19:43] superm1: Toss me a 1.11 with the correct build-dep, and I think we're good.