On Thu, Dec 06, 2001 at 12:37:24AM +0100, Svante Signell wrote:
> I know that xine is now renamed to xine-ui, just being lazy not to
> explicitly write out xine-ui, libxine0, libxine0-dev. Sorry for the
> confusion.
>
> A follow-up question wrt this issue: How can one see that a newer
> version has been renamed, as in this case xine has been renamed to
> xine-ui. Without doing a thorough investigation the obvious solution
> would be to just install xine and get the old version, even in
> unstable!!
You provide a dummy package called xine which Depends: on xine-ui, but
itself contains nothing. After the next release, you can get rid of the
xine package.
If xine did not exist in potato, you can arguably get away without the
dummy package, though.
> This brings up an old question of mine about debian packages. Way back
> I was told that date information is not possible to have in
> description files since the time spent in upload is undefined
> etc. However, there are two dates that _can_ be given, the upstream
> package release date and the package maintainer release date.
Yes, those should be found in
/usr/share/doc/xine-ui/changelog.{,Debian}.gz, respectively, not in the
extended package description.
> Is date information completely out of the question?
No, this information exists, someone just needs to write or modify the
appropriate tools to retrieve it.
Except the part you mentioned about the date a given package was
installed on the system. I don't think dpkg keeps track of such
information. See 1000 wishlist bugs against dpkg for logging.
--
G. Branden Robinson | Never attribute to malice that
Debian GNU/Linux | which can be adequately explained
branden@debian.org | by stupidity.
http://people.debian.org/~branden/ |
Attachment:
pgp1_qVJ5bnxd.pgp
Description: PGP signature