On Mon, Dec 10, 2001 at 01:52:15AM +0100, Christian Surchi wrote: > On Mon, Dec 10, 2001 at 12:42:32AM +0000, Mark Brown wrote: > > Effectively what you're doing is turning the old package into a virtual > > package provided by the new one. > I remember some messages about it and I don't think we could simply > "invent" virtual packages. And then, don't you suggest any "Conflicts"? I meant to suggest all three of conflicts, replaces and provides. It's OK to define virtual packages for use in a small group of related packages - it's when you want random other packages to pay attention that you have to worry about policy. -- "You grabbed my hand and we fell into it, like a daydream - or a fever."
Attachment:
pgpUHXVFjn6VG.pgp
Description: PGP signature