Re: About the Breaks: field.
> Conflicts is like a reverse Depends. It affects package
> Breaks is like a reverse Pre-Depends. It affects package unpacking.
I think that's precisely backwards. The rules are:
A -[pre-]depends-> B && more-than-unpacked(A)
( A -conflicts->B || B -conflicts-> A ) && more-than-config-files(A)
A -pre-depends-> B && more-than-config-files(A)
I propose for Breaks:
A -breaks->B && more-than-config-files(A)
So Breaks will allow the the packages to coexist, but one will be
deconfigured (--auto-deconfigure) and hopefully upgraded later.
Conflicts doesn't allow the packages to coexist at all.
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
Trouble? e-mail to email@example.com .