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

Re: Sorting out mail-transport-agent mess

On Fri, May 16, 2008 at 04:53:49AM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
> >> > Er, no, that wouldn't happen.  As long as packages correctly depend on
> >> > default-mta | mail-transport-agent, this will have no impact on upgrades.

> >> This can happen if user has 'default-mta' package installed, and it
> >> changes (if it is done like with 'gcc' package now).

> > Ah, ok.  Yes, that's a possibility; I was only considering the case that a
> > user had an MTA installed that was not the default.

> > So the best option here does seem after all to get apt to look at package
> > priorities when satisfying virtual packages.

> Package exim4:
> Provides: default-mta

> Package: foo
> Depends: default-mta | mail-transport-agent

> This should be enough to single out one MTA as the one to be installed
> if in doubt and should not cause a change in who provides default-mta
> to suddenly install a different mta.

> Any reasons against that?

Given that no one has come up with any objections to this in the past three
months: no, this looks like a very good solution.

(There was discussion about this again on #debian-devel today, but I don't
think there were any new points raised.  If someone sees a reason not to
proceed with this solution, they should speak up.)

I don't think this is a radical new policy that warrants TC approval, so
perhaps a bug against policy and a bug against exim4-daemon-light should be
the next steps?

Steve Langasek                   Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS
Debian Developer                   to set it on, and I can move the world.
Ubuntu Developer                                    http://www.debian.org/
slangasek@ubuntu.com                                     vorlon@debian.org

Reply to: