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

Bug#218387: linux-kernel-headers: uninstallable alongside dvb-dev



On Thu, Oct 30, 2003 at 09:13:03PM -0500, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 31, 2003 at 02:47:38AM +0100, Guillem Jover wrote:
> > Package: linux-kernel-headers
> > Version: 2.5.999-test7-bk-5
> > Severity: important
> > 
> > The package cannot be installed alongside dvb-dev, beacuse l-k-h
> > provides conflicting include files (/usr/include/dvb/*).
> > So I think l-k-h should Provides: and Conflicts: with existing
> > dvb-dev packages.
> 
> I doubt it should Provide: dvd-dev.

I suppose Replaces: as well ?

> I'm guessing that dvb-dev has other files in it besides just those
> headers.

The versions in testing and sid only have headers and docu. Here is the
list:

/usr/include/linux/dvb/audio.h
/usr/include/linux/dvb/ca.h
/usr/include/linux/dvb/dmx.h
/usr/include/linux/dvb/frontend.h
/usr/include/linux/dvb/net.h
/usr/include/linux/dvb/osd.h
/usr/include/linux/dvb/version.h
/usr/include/linux/dvb/video.h
/usr/share/doc/dvb-dev/README.CABLE
/usr/share/doc/dvb-dev/README.EON
/usr/share/doc/dvb-dev/copyright
/usr/share/doc/dvb-dev/README.Debian
/usr/share/doc/dvb-dev/dvbapi.ps.gz
/usr/share/doc/dvb-dev/changelog.Debian.gz

And for other packages the only relevant files are the headers, because
/usr/share/doc cannot be assured that will be there.

> The first thing that needs to happen is dvb-dev needs to be fixed.
> Or am I wrong and dvb-dev needs to be removed?

There are three options that I can think now:

1. Change dvb-dev to conflict with l-k-h.
2. Remove headers from dvb-dev (only provide docu), depend on l-k-h.
   But l-k-h then must conflict-provide-replace old versions, or will
   break upgrades from stable.
3. Remove dvb-dev, then l-k-h must conflict-provide-replace it so
   upgrades from stable won't break.

The other problem is that there is a package dvb-driver-source that
dependes on dvb-dev and should depend on dvb-dev | l-k-h I'll file
the info in another bug.

regards,
guillem



Reply to: