On Oct 06, Aurelien Jarno <aurelien@aurel32.net> wrote: > Ah this doesn't match the version in unstable, it's only in NEW for now. > I guess we need to wait for it to get out of there first. For reasons which I do not understand, the ftpmasters obliquely let me know that they will not accept libxcrypt from NEW until the libc maintainers will explicitly confirm that we have agreed on a plan to use it. Do you mind confirming this? > > So I think that libc6 should have Depends/Replaces on libcrypt1. > Agreed for the Depends. I don't get why it needs a Replaces. On the > other hand libcrypt1 needs a Replaces: libc6, libc6.1, libc0.1, libc0.3 > with the correct version. Yes, this is what I meant. So: Package: libcrypt1 Breaks: libc6 (<< 2.29-X) Replaces: libc6 (<< 2.29-X) Package: libcrypt1-dev Breaks: libc6-dev (<< 2.29-X) Replaces: libc6-dev (<< 2.29-X) Package: libc6 Depends: libcrypt1 Package: libc6-dev Depends: libcrypt1-dev And all the architecture-specific variations which I will figure out. (Also, do not forget about the man pages in the -dev packages.) There is also a libcrypt1 udeb: do you prefer to start building it now or deal with it later? -- ciao, Marco
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature