[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Fixing mess involving emacs23, emacs24, and the emacs metapackage



Hi,

Rob Browning wrote:
> I made a bit of a mess with respect to the emacs metapackage in unstable
> and wheezy that I'd like to fix.
>
> The problem is that both emacs23 and emacs24 provide the emacs
> metapackage,

With "provide" you mean "build" as in "source-package builds
binary-package", not as in "Provides: emacs", right? (IIRC all the
emacs packages do a "Provides: emacsen", not a "Provides: emacs"
anyway.)

> One plausible solution would be to just move the emacs metapackage to
> its own emacs-defaults source package (a la gcc-defaults), and so a bit
> of discussion on IRC produced a plan that I'd like to vet here:
> 
>   - Upload a new emacs23 to for wheezy that doesn't provide the emacs binary.
>   - Upload a new emacs-defaults for wheezy that provides the emacs binary.
>   - Upload a new emacs24 to unstable that doesn't provide the emacs binary.

With "providing binary", do you mean "building a binary package" or
"containing a compiled binary file" as in "/usr/bin/emacs"?

The latter would likely break update-alternatives and non-trivial to
package, so I suspect you think of the emacs binary-_package_ being
built by the new emacs-defaults source-package.

With regards to the version of the emacs-defaults source package (or
at least the new emacs binary-package, AFAICS it'll need an epoch
added to go down from 24 to 23 again, i.e. use "1:23.$something".

> Please let me know if that sounds reasonable, or if you have some other
> way you'd rather handle the problem.

Sounds ok for me. (But I'm not part of the release team, I just wanted
to have clarified some ambiguous terms.)

		Regards, Axel
-- 
 ,''`.  |  Axel Beckert <abe@debian.org>, http://people.debian.org/~abe/
: :' :  |  Debian Developer, ftp.ch.debian.org Admin
`. `'   |  1024D: F067 EA27 26B9 C3FC 1486  202E C09E 1D89 9593 0EDE
  `-    |  4096R: 2517 B724 C5F6 CA99 5329  6E61 2FF9 CD59 6126 16B5


Reply to: