Re: Bug#170385: marked as done (libc6 should conflict with wine (<< 0.0.20021007-1) and perhaps other packages)
reopen 170385
thanks
> On Tue, Dec 03, 2002 at 04:54:00PM -0800, Jeff Bailey wrote:
> > On Wed, Dec 04, 2002 at 12:33:19AM +0000, James Troup wrote:
> > > Err, this is ridiculous; glibc broke partial upgrades so glibc needs
> > > to fix that (as best it can).
> > > There's a precedent for doing this -
> > > even in glibc (see it's existing conflict lines) and I have no idea
> > > what potential "grief" you're referring to that would be created by the
> > > simple fix required for this bug.
> > Glibc broke nothing in this case. Wine was written badly [...]
Which is to say that the changes in glibc broke wine. It doesn't matter
whose fault it was, it needs to be fixed so partial upgrades work
correctly, and the only way to fix it is to change glibc.
> > The grief I'm refering to is that we then have to decide - Do we add
> > conflicts for deb's that aren't part of Debian like winex, and all that
> > various vendor jdks? Where does it stop?
On Tue, Dec 03, 2002 at 07:56:49PM -0500, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
> Simple, we conflict against the popular (i.e. reported) ones. There's
> no real burden in doing this!
Exactly.
Cheers,
aj
--
Anthony Towns <aj@humbug.org.au> <http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/>
I don't speak for anyone save myself. GPG signed mail preferred.
``If you don't do it now, you'll be one year older when you do.''
Reply to: