Bug#790816: RFS: roxterm/3.0.1-1

[Vincent Cheng <vcheng@debian.org>]

On Sat, Jul 4, 2015 at 7:35 AM, Tony Houghton <h@realh.co.uk> wrote:

> One other point I noticed is that currently I have roxterm-data Breaks
> and Replaces roxterm << 3.0.0-1 (actually I put 2 instead of 3 by
> mistake so that needs changing anyway), where roxterm << 3 is the old
> virtual package. As there is no direct replacement for that, do you
> agree I should keep the Breaks where it is but remove the Replaces?
> Breaks probably isn't strictly necessary either, but it might be a good
> idea just in case there's a clash in /usr/share/doc/roxterm.

If there's an upgrade scenario where file ownership changes from
roxterm to roxterm-data or vice versa (i.e. one package overwrites
files owned by the other), you need to declare both Breaks and
Replaces. So if roxterm and roxterm-data both owned files with the
same name in /usr/share/doc/roxterm or elsewhere, currently or in a
past release, then yes, you'll need both Breaks and Replaces.

(If you have time, please upload an updated package to mentors so it's
easier to discuss any further changes.)

Regards,
Vincent