On Mon, 2013-12-09 at 13:56 +1100, Craig Small wrote: > As pidof is moving from sysvinit-utils to procps-base in the next > release, I want to check I've got the way dpkg handles flags correctly. > > procps-base will contain the new pidof and will be > Essential: yes > Breaks: sysvinit-utils << 2.88dsf-43 > > Now, if there is a new Essential package, is that automatically > installed? Yes, apt automatically installs new essential packages (possibly dependent on score). > What happens with the Essential and Breaks, one says "install this now" > the other says "dont install this if a verison of sysvinit-utils is > there". That's a bit of a conflict. I don't know the answer to this. > Is Replaces a better way of doing this as procps-base is replacing > one file from sysvinit-utils? You need to use both Replaces and Breaks. See policy section 7.3. > Other than removing pidof, is there anything the syscinit-utils > people need to do? > > As its a bit tricky, I really don't want to mess up the > inter-dependencies. A non-working file init uses is a bad thing. You should be able to test this with a private APT repository. Though this must have been done before, so someone should be able to answer from experience. Ben. -- Ben Hutchings One of the nice things about standards is that there are so many of them.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part