OoO En cette fin de matinée radieuse du samedi 17 mai 2008, vers 11:17, Alexander Bürger <acfbuerger@googlemail.com> disait: >> When using Conflicts and having files in common with the other package, >> you need Replaces as well. Otherwise, during upgrade, the user may see >> error messages about your package trying to erase files owned by the >> other (not yet removed) package. > So what do you think about section 7.5 in the policy manual? As I said, > to me it is confusing. It does not explicitly say that Replaces: must > come together with Conflicts:, it sounds more like there are different > meanings if it is alone (replace only some files) or with Conflicts: > (replace whole package). Hi Alexander! [This message is about using Replaces without Conflicts] I am not sure either. As you noted, the policy does not say to not use it alone, but this just seems odd to me. Let's hope that someone else will enlighten us on this matter. The valid way to replace a file without conflicting with a package is to use diversion. This is not a solution in your case because you would have to ask maintainer of ipe to use diversion too and since figtoipe is no longer shipped with ipe, he won't be able to. -- /* * For moronic filesystems that do not allow holes in file. * We may have to extend the file. */ 2.4.0-test2 /usr/src/linux/fs/buffer.c
Attachment:
pgp3b2Wc3Oj1I.pgp
Description: PGP signature