Re: (low priority) udeb naming

[Goswin von Brederlow <brederlo@informatik.uni-tuebingen.de>]

Gaudenz Steinlin <gaudenz@soziologie.ch> writes:

> Joey Hess schrieb:
> > On 13 Dec 2000 I wrote:
> >
> 
> >>James Troup wrote:
> >>
> >>>You can't have a .udeb with the same name as a .deb; this is enforced
> >>>by katie (i.e. the package will be REJECTed) at JoeyH's specific
> >>>request.
> >>
> >>BTW my reasoning behind that is it could get confusing if someone
> >>manages to install a udeb onto a full debian system, and then runs into
> >>bugs and we don't realize they are due to the udeb, etc.
> > But there are obviously other ways to guard against that if it is a
> 
> > problem. For example, udebs could depend on broken-system, and then dpkg
> > would be pretty clear about what happens if you install them. :-)
> LOL, and rootskel could provide "broken-system" for debian-installer!
> Hopefully this does not mean that the whole debian-installer will be
> broken all the time...
> 
> We are working to prove this "Provide" woill always be "wrong" :-)
> 
> gaudenz

Provide/Depend debian-installer-system might give less incentive to
joke about it.

MfG
        Goswin