Le 13/04/2014 15:33, Ole Streicher a écrit : > Hi Thibaut, > > my mail program seemed to eat the citations. 2nd attempt: > > Am 13.04.2014 14:45, schrieb Thibaut Paumard: >> Why does the package Conflict and Replace cpl-plugin-xsh? None of >> the files are the same (so at least the Replace is wrong). > > I mainly followed the rule of renaming a package. > "Replaces" is correct wrt policy: > > 7.6 Overwriting files and replacing packages - Replaces > > Packages can declare in their control file that they should overwrite > files in certain other packages, or completely replace other packages. > The Replaces control field has these two distinct purposes. Dear Ole, I think you misunderstood the uses of Replaces. Like the other types of dependencies, "Replaces" is a technical tool to warrant a certain behaviour of the package manager. The fact that you are trying to replace a package by another one in the archive does not mean that Replaces is useful or even right for your purpose. The two use cases are: - file f was is package A, now it is in package B. Either package A is removed from the archive, or there is a new version of package A without file f. (Normally, Breaks+Replaces). - packages A and B provide the same functionality, but should not be installed at the same time on the system. (Only real use case for Conflicts+Replaces).* You are in neither of those two situations. Now in Policy there is also this sentence (near the end of 7.4): "Neither Breaks nor Conflicts should be used unless two packages cannot be installed at the same time or installing them both causes one of them to be broken or unusable." The Provides field is really useful only if there are other packages already depending on package A. I think you should just completely remove the three fields. Conflicts is wrong, Breaks seems wrong too since nothing is broken, and Replaces is useless without either Conflicts or Breaks. Kind regards, Thibaut.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature