Re: Bug#29104: X packages provide instead of replace
> > All of the font packages "Conflict and Provide" their older versions. I
> > believe what was intended was "Conflict and Replace". Otherwise, you
> > manually have to remove each old package. And, since there should be
> > few packages depending upon font packages by name, it really shouldn't
> > provide the old package name.
>
> They currently Conflict, Replace, and Provide their old names. For
> versions -2 through -6 I did as you recommended, and got roundly bitched at
> about it. By the GIMP maintainer, by others, .
It's unfortunate I don't have a log of the installation. Dselect prompted
me with a conflict screen for every font package. The 3.3.2.3a-7 version
does have all three, so perhaps it was -6 being installed at the time.
> As with so many of my decisions regarding X, if I do things one way I get
> people yelling at me, and if I do them another way I get a different group
> of people yelling at me.
Sorry, I didn't mean to sound like I was yelling. I assumed that it was
a simple mistake of having type "provides" instead of "replaces".
> Unless you can point me to some specific policy that says I should just
> Conflict and Replace, instead of Conflict, Replace, and Provide, I'm going
> to stick with what I did in -7 because it decreases the volume of abuse I
> receive in email and on the #debian IRC channel.
I agree. However, there is no point to provide obsolete packages for
very long, so what I would suggest is...
After the release, file bugs against any package depending on the obsolete
name. After 2 weeks or so, feel free to remove the "provides:" line.
Brian
( bcwhite@verisim.com )
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Debian GNU/Linux! Search it at http://insite.verisim.com/search/debian/simple
Reply to: