[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: aspell upgrade woes

On Wed, Jul 20, 2005 at 09:52:13AM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:

> > Reintroducing the libaspell15 could cause problems with /usr/bin/aspell,
> > since it actually goes outside the C API of libaspell and uses C++
> > linkage to some symbols.  I "fixed" this bug (#307481) by making
> > aspell-bin (or now just aspell) depend on the Source-Version of
> > libaspell.

> > However, that fix is not in the stable package of aspell.  In stable,
> > aspell-bin just depends on libaspell15 (>= 0.60), so a partial upgrade
> > of just libaspell15 would break aspell-bin.  I suppose I could make the
> > new libaspell15 conflict with the old aspell-bin, but that's rather
> > clumsy and could make upgrades even more awkward.

> Why? This is exactly what a versioned conflict is for.

That doesn't mean the packaging tools handle the case gracefully (by user
standards).  Most of the upgrade problems people saw with woody->sarge had
to do precisely with these << conflicts that policy counter-recommends.

> The packages have to be upgraded as pair and apt/dpkg will hapily do
> that.

Or, apt will happily *remove* the conflicted-with package instead...

But anyway, see my previous message for why the conflict with aspell may be
less problematic on upgrades.

Steve Langasek
postmodern programmer

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: