On Thu, Jun 23, 2005 at 12:38:34PM -0300, Margarita Manterola wrote: > On 6/23/05, Roberto C. Sanchez <roberto@familiasanchez.net> wrote: > > OK. How would I make use of this. I was going to adopt iceme and > > icepref, but then I saw that they are abandoned upstream. They have > > become modules of IceWMCP. I am going to package IceWMCP with the > > intent that it replace iceme and icepref. > > > > Someone recommended that I use dummy packages of iceme and icepref that > > depend on icewmcp. But, if I also make icewmcp Replace and Conflict > > with iceme and icepref, will that not cause problems (since the new > > dummy versions of iceme and icepref will depend on icewmpc)? > > Well, of course, you cannot adopt both methods. Either you use the > dummy package method or you use the Replace and Conflict method. Right. However, what I would like is to be able to do it *without* using dummy packages. I think that what I want is not possible without dummy packages. That is where I see a problem. The current Replaces/Conflicts mechanism doesn't handle it all well. I agree a change that makes it work more elegantly would be nice. It would also help to eliminate a number of dummy and transitional packages that exist for no other reason than to be a hacky work around for replacement of obselete packages. -Roberto -- Roberto C. Sanchez http://familiasanchez.net/~sanchezr
Attachment:
pgpjRx27p3qEE.pgp
Description: PGP signature