Hi,
Guido Guenther wrote:
> No. This package is from Debian's oo Team and from experimental distribution,
I know that. I am one of the maintainers of it...
> Package: openoffice.org-thesaurus-en-us
> Priority: optional
> Section: text
> Installed-Size: 3972
> Maintainer: Debian OpenOffice Team <debian-openoffice@lists.debian.org>
> Architecture: all
> Source: openoffice.org
> Version: 1.1.0+1.1.1a-1
> Replaces: openoffice.org (<< 1.1.0+1.1.1a-1)
This Replaces: ensures proper upgrades 1.1.0-x -> 1.1.0+* / 1.1.1-x.
It ensures the file conflicts is resolved when installing
openoffice.org-thesaurus-en-us on a system when openoffice.org
still contains the files which were split out.
Then upgrades (which happens in your case) could be problematic when
there came a new openoffice.org (1.1.0-6) which does not know of the split.
It didn't have to.
If you install an experimental package on your system when you don't need
it (the thesaurus is in openoffice.org in 1.1.0-x) you have to look
where you are. "Normal" upgrades will work.
I don't see why a Conflicts: is neccessary, the Replaces: is enough for
upgrades. I already had this discussion on IRC (#debian.de) yesterday.
I'll look whether I can convince myself (or you do?) that this Conflicts:
makes sense. I currently think it doesn't.
Downgrades are not supported by the packaging system anyhow.
Grüße/Regards,
René
--
.''`. René Engelhard -- Debian GNU/Linux Developer
: :' : http://www.debian.org | http://people.debian.org/~rene/
`. `' rene@debian.org | GnuPG-Key ID: 248AEB73
`- Fingerprint: 41FA F208 28D4 7CA5 19BB 7AD9 F859 90B0 248A EB73
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature