Aníbal Monsalve Salazar <anibal@debian.org> (2016-01-26):
> On Tue, 2016-01-26 10:23:13 +0100, Tobias Frost wrote:
> > this is a question for you:
> >
> > https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2016/01/msg00248.html
> >
> > {quote}
> > Speaking of this particular udeb, I've just spotted libpng16-16-udeb has
> > a Conflicts against libpng12-0-udeb. I'm not sure why, and the changelog
> > doesn't seem to explain either. libpng16-16 and libpng12-0 seems to be
> > co-installable, so I'm not sure why their respective udebs shouldn't be.
> > {/quote}
>
> The Conflicts against libpng12-0-udeb can be removed.
Looks fair on principle, thanks.
Has anyone tested a debian installer build where some packages were
built against libpng12-0-udeb and some other against libpng16-16-udeb?
Does that work? Or are we looking at a giant transition where everything
must switch to libpng16 at once?
Mraw,
KiBi.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature