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

Re: About the Breaks: field.


On Fri, 10 Oct 1997, Scott Ellis wrote:

> On Fri, 10 Oct 1997, Santiago Vila Doncel wrote:
> > Is the "Breaks:" field going to be implemented in
> > dpkg | dselect | deity | pkg-order ?
> > 
> > How many packages does libc6 break? Will the upgrade be really smooth
> > without this "Breaks" field or it will only work if you upgrade
> > *everything*? It will be possible to install only a limited set of 
> > packages from hamm without breaking anything?
> libc6 breaks nothing.  Installing other stuff in the wrong order breaks
> stuff.  Follow my libc5-libc6 mini-howto for debian (located on my web
> page) and you shouldn't have any problems.

Exactly: If we have to read a mini-howto before upgrading, there must be
something wrong in the packaging system. Also, if the user wants to
install packages in any order and some stuff becomes broken, it is clear
that the current dependencies are not what they should be, or we need to
improve the packaging system.

An example: Since I upgraded to libc6, man-db stopped working and I
always get a core dump. I don't want to read a mini-howto [*]
saying that "if I install libc6, I should upgrade man-db also".
Instead, I would like to see the following field:

Breaks: (man-db <= 2.3.10-38)

in libc6, so that dpkg automatically refuses to install it if I try to
install libc6 and not a newer man-db at the same time.

[*] Of course a mini-howto is welcome in lack of a better packaging

I would like to hear from Manoj or Klee, to know whether this is difficult
to implement or not in dpkg | pkg-order. If we can, we should start
collecting now all the information we have about all known ways to break
the system by installing libc6.

Version: 2.6.3ia
Charset: latin1


TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org . 
Trouble?  e-mail to templin@bucknell.edu .

Reply to: