Re: If *-module depends on *-utils, should *-source recommend it?

[Vince <loki@internode.on.net>]

On Wed, Jan 12, 2005 at 01:12:08AM -0500, William Ballard wrote:

> And *I'm* being precise when I said "foo 1.0" is removed and not 
> replaced.

This is what Cameron said:

> > User runs "dpkg -i foo-modules_2.0_arch.deb"
> > 
> > dpkg first removes foo-modules_1.0
> > dpkg then check dependencies of foo-modules_2.0
> > dpkg complains that foo-utils is not installed and aborts the
> > installation of foo-modules_2.0

Scott says that the first of these steps does not happen - no equivalent
of 'dpkg --remove foo-modules' is done. That is all that this subthread
was about. Do you genuinely disagree with his assessment of what dpkg
does?  If not, then I don't understand who you are disagreeing with.


   Vince

-- 
    Vincent Ho
loki /at/ internode.on.net

Every complex problem is a simple hierarchy of simple problems.