On Sat, Nov 12, 2005 at 06:21:06AM -0800, Steve Langasek wrote: > On Sat, Nov 12, 2005 at 11:52:45PM +1100, Daniel Stone wrote: > > Obviously, this is nvidia-glx's problem, not xorg's. > > The nvidia-glx package exists, and was here first. You don't get to say > it's somebody else's problem when *your* package causes a user's > dist-upgrade from sarge to etch to fail. > > If the nvidia-glx package should not be providing this file, then that's a > bug as well, but you haven't given explanation of *why* this is a bug in > nvidia-glx. If the file needs to be removed/moved, then it's fine to > wait until this is done in nvidia-glx before adding an appropriate > Conflicts: or Replaces:, but in the end the bug still needs to be dealt > with in xserver-xorg. At this stage, I will defer to your superior knowledge of the situation, and not reassign the bug. Enjoy.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature