Re: Packages should not Conflict on the basis of duplicate functionality

To: Debian Developerslist <debian-devel@lists.debian.org>
Subject: Re: Packages should not Conflict on the basis of duplicate functionality
From: "Martin Bialasinski" <martin@internet-treff.uni-koeln.de>
Date: 29 Sep 1999 19:46:31 +0200
Message-id: <[🔎] 87iu4tobk8.fsf@haitech.martin.home>
In-reply-to: Laurel Fan's message of "Wed, 29 Sep 1999 13:08:51 -0400 (EDT)"
References: <[🔎] 19990924110106.A24861@dman.com> <[🔎] 008c01bf069f$5a931aa0$1701a8c0@datacoresoftware.com> <[🔎] 19990924233428.O9912@gerf.gerf.org> <[🔎] 19990925011111.B17910@usatoday.com> <[🔎] 19990927130557.A8109@taz.net.au> <[🔎] 19990927032154.A30222@usatoday.com> <[🔎] 19990929065601.B25093@taz.net.au> <[🔎] xe13dvyqpyj.fsf@paycheck.thok.org> <[🔎] 19990929155137.E30440@taz.net.au> <[🔎] 8rwYSXu00UwH0Sc9I0@andrew.cmu.edu>

* "Laurel" == Laurel Fan <lf25+@andrew.cmu.edu> wrote:

Laurel> install)?  The install program and the docs say "skip the
Laurel> Select step of dselect"... Does it mean "skip it because you
Laurel> will confuse the installer" or "you should skip it because
Laurel> it's already done"?

The second is correct.

Ciao,
	Martin
.

Reply to:

References:
- Packages should not Conflict on the basis of duplicate functionality
  - From: Clint Adams <schizo@debian.org>
- Re: Packages should not Conflict on the basis of duplicate functionality
  - From: "Scott K. Ellis" <storm@gate.net>
- Re: Packages should not Conflict on the basis of duplicate functionality
  - From: The Doctor What <docwhat@gerf.org>
- Re: Packages should not Conflict on the basis of duplicate functionality
  - From: Raul Miller <raul@usatoday.com>
- Re: Packages should not Conflict on the basis of duplicate functionality
  - From: Craig Sanders <cas@taz.net.au>
- Re: Packages should not Conflict on the basis of duplicate functionality
  - From: Raul Miller <raul@usatoday.com>
- Re: Packages should not Conflict on the basis of duplicate functionality
  - From: Craig Sanders <cas@taz.net.au>
- Re: Packages should not Conflict on the basis of duplicate functionality
  - From: eichin@thok.org (Mark W. Eichin)
- Re: Packages should not Conflict on the basis of duplicate functionality
  - From: Craig Sanders <cas@taz.net.au>
- Re: Packages should not Conflict on the basis of duplicate functionality
  - From: Laurel Fan <lf25+@andrew.cmu.edu>

Prev by Date: Re: Packages should not Conflict on the basis of duplicate functionality
Next by Date: RE: ITP: portsentry
Previous by thread: Re: Packages should not Conflict on the basis of duplicate functionality
Next by thread: Re: Packages should not Conflict on the basis of duplicate functionality
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread