Bug#568515: E: unable to schedule circular actions
Rene Engelhard wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Fri, Feb 05, 2010 at 10:16:06PM +0200, Eugene V. Lyubimkin wrote:
>> No, no one package manager can upgrade packages in this situation directly, in
>> theory. See http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=560896#74.
>> libapt-based package managers upgrade them indirectly silently, cupt - does
>> not, by default.
>
> And why does cupt that different? I see no reason to break other
> packages by changing behaviour there. But anyway...
Because silently indirectly upgrading package may silently may silently break
package maintainer script which catch upgrade situations.
>> If Replaces don't make sense there, then Conflicts, probably, too.
>
> Eh, no, read again what Replaces: has for semantics in the policy (7.3 and
> 7.6.1)
> Replaces: just says that it replaces files. Which here obviously is not
> the case. (Or for replacing packages completely with Conflicts/Replaces/Provides
> as in 7.6.2)
I am pretty sure I understand what package dependency fields mean. I however
have no good idea about all interdependencies within openoffice.org packages,
they are very complex, without doubts. I explained why cupt treats mutual
conflicts as error. If you agree - fix the dependencies as you want, I just
proposed some variants. If you disagree - reassign back, I will add
openoffice.org to the list of packages to be upgraded indirectly.
--
Eugene V. Lyubimkin aka JackYF, JID: jackyf.devel(maildog)gmail.com
C++/Perl developer, Debian Developer
Reply to: