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

Re: FVWM 2.2 officially released

On Tue, 23 Feb 1999, Julian Gilbey wrote:

> fvwm2 package?  I know that this is an ongoing problem, so here are
> the alternatives as I see them:
> (1) Have fvwm become an empty package (priority extra) which Depends:
>     fvwm2.  OK.
> (3) Use some nice, new Replaced-by: feature or similar.  If it
>     exists.

Just have fvwm2 Provides: and Replaces: fvwm.
This is how it is done usually.
It's up to apt/dselect to detect that a new package replaces another one.

> Also, fvwm is now copying the Linux numbering scheme of 2.2.x being
> the stable version and 2.3.x being unstable.  How would it be to have
> a separate (conflicting) fvwm2-beta package following the development
> track?

What for? Isn't the stable version enough? In case it's _really_ needed
(the policy says alpha/beta version should not be packaged), it should
probably go to the experimental section.

- Vincent RENARDIAS  vincent@{{ldsol,pipo}.com,{debian,openhardware}.org} -
- Debian/GNU Linux:   http://www.openhardware.org    Logiciels du soleil: -
- http://www.fr.debian.org    Open Hardware:         http://www.ldsol.com -
-"Microsoft est à l'informatique ce que le grumeau est à la crépe..."     -

Reply to: