Re: A new way to specify versionned dependencies may be needed
Nicolas Boullis <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> One package of mine needs to conflict with a few consecutive versions
> of a package. Let's say that the package foo introduced a feature that
> conflicts with my package in version A and removed it in version B.
> So I'd like my package to conflict with versions A to B of foo. I tried
> to specify it with "Conflicts: foo (>> A), foo (<< B)" but, as I feared,
> it does not work since it now conflicts both with all versions >> A and
> with all versions << B (as A << B, that means all versions).
How about "Depends: foo (<< A) | foo (>> B)"?
> Currently, there's no need for such a feature for positive dependencies
> (Depends, Recommends and Suggests), because there is a workaround:
> "Depends: foo (>> A), foo (<< B)" works for "Depends: foo (>> A, << B)",
> but it only works because only one version of foo can be installed at a
> time. If versionned provides are ever implemented, it may become
> possible to have several versions of a package at a time, thus breaking
> this workaround.
The above will also break if versioned provides are implemented.