Re: Correct way to rename a binary package

[Brian May <brian@microcomaustralia.com.au>]

Luca Capello wrote:
> Since I want to support smooth upgrades, I need to do the following:
>
>   Package: hunchentoot
>   Version: 2.0
>   Provides: cl-hunchentoot [1]
>   Replace: cl-hunchentoot (<< 2.0)
>   Conflicts: cl-hunchentoot (<< 2.0)
>
>   Package: cl-hunchentoot
>   Depends: hunchentoot
>   
I was under the impression the "conflicts" was considered bad (it makes 
upgrading from an old version of cl-hunchentoot to hunchentoot harder), 
and it was generally better to leave the conflicts out and rely on the 
replaces header alone.

Or... maybe this is a slightly different situation.

Brian May