Re: Improving in-place upgrades of Ada packages from Lenny to Squeeze
David Kalnischkies <kalnischkies+debian@gmail.com> writes:
> 2010/5/28 Stephen Leake <stephen_leake@stephe-leake.org>:
>> Ludovic Brenta <ludovic@ludovic-brenta.org> writes:
>>
>>> Stephen Leake wrote:
>>>> Ludovic Brenta <ludovic@ludovic-brenta.org> writes:
>>>>> The reason for all this is that when a package libX2-dev Conflicts:
>>> with
>>>>> and Replaces: a package libX1-dev, aptitude does not remove libX1-dev
>>>>> and install libX2-dev; instead, it marks libX1-dev as broken and leaves
>>>>> libX2-dev uninstalled.
>>>>
>>>> This seems like a clear bug in aptitude.
>
> The name libX1-dev suggests that it can be co-installed with libX2-dev and co
> as otherwise the version number wouldn't make much sense
> (yeah i know, in a few other cases… i said not much) -
> automatic updates in which libX1-dev is killed for good by libX2-dev
> is absolutely not what i would expect as packages will (build-)depend
> on libX1-dev which obviously can not be satisfied by libX2-dev -- if
> it could it would be called libX1-dev also or even libX-dev and only
> the real library is called libX2 …
Yes, that is all true. It is also required by the rules of the Ada
language. Please read the Debian Ada policy [1] (in particular, section
3.2) for an explanation of this naming convention.
> This is normally done for Package renames and described in e.g.
> http://wiki.debian.org/Renaming_a_Package
That is an excellent suggestion; I'll try it.
> So i would recommend to describe more what you actually want and
> your specific problem
That was done by Ludovic's original post in this thread.
[1] http://people.debian.org/~lbrenta/debian-ada-policy.html
--
-- Stephe
Reply to: