Re: Renaming a package
On Thu, Jun 01, 2006 at 11:46:12PM +0200, Daniel Kobras wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 01, 2006 at 01:06:20PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
> > Oooh, Method B is one I haven't seen proposed before in the context of dummy
> > packages. That looks far more elegant to me than the alternatives. Have
> > you tested that dpkg really does do the right thing here, given that the
> > replacing package gets installed first (since it's a dependency)?
>
> I did that once in 2003 for dx but hit a different bug then: dpkg would
> try to configure oldpkg when it had disappeared already. It worked fine
> with a patch to dpkg that went into the sarge version, but I haven't
> tested it since then. I'll give it another try to be sure.
Looking at the actual control file I used back then, an additional
Conflicts: oldpkg (<< First-Dummy-Version) is needed to ensure correct
ordering. newpkg needs to be unpacked after the dummy version of
oldpkg. Which makes the solution a lot less elegant, but apt still is
able to cope. Not sure about britney, though. Anyway, as noted in my
previous mail to this thread, when testing this method on unstable and
sarge, I hit a bug in apt that rules it out for etch. If you still
like this method, we can get the necessary fixes in and promote it for
etch+1, though.
Regards,
Daniel.
Reply to: