Re: dummy packages and "Replaces:" field
* Margarita Manterola (email@example.com) [050623 16:45]:
> On 6/23/05, Steve Greenland <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> > > Is there a better solution to this?
> > I think that there have been proposals for a new header that
> > accomplishes what you want,
> Well, a new header would be nice, of course. But it would mean a
> change in policy, that's why I was thinking of using the existing
Frankly speaking, I prefer a new header better than overloading the
semantic of the existing headers.