On Wed, Aug 18, 2010 at 12:31:59 -0700, Russ Allbery wrote: > Russ Allbery <rra@debian.org> writes: > > Piotr Kaczuba <pepe@attika.ath.cx> writes: > > >> Before 1.2.65 logcheck depended on mailx, which was and still is > >> provided by both mailutils and bsd-mailx. Now that logcheck depends > >> explicitly on bsd-mailx, you can't have installed both logcheck and > >> mailutils because mailutils and bsd-mailx exclude each other. > > > mailx is not a registered virtual package name in Policy. It sounds like > > it should be? If unrelated packages should know about it for > > dependencies, I don't think it meets the "private use among coordinated > > packages" exception. > > I propose the following addition. Seconds or objections? (As mentioned > elsewhere in the file, the * indicates that the providing packages are > using alternatives, which appears to be the case.) > Is there a spec somewhere about the command line arguments for mailx? I know that bsd-mailx and heirloom-mailx do completely different things for -a, e.g., which is a major pain, and I'm not sure they should be alternatives. Cheers, Julien
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature