[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Bug#578854: New workding for Conflicts, Breaks, and related sections



Stuart Prescott <stuart+debian@nanonanonano.net> writes:
> On Wednesday 16 June 2010 19:07:33 Russ Allbery wrote:

>> +	    Normally, <tt>Breaks</tt> should be used in conjunction
>> +	    with <tt>Replaces</tt>.<footnote>
>> +	      To see why <tt>Breaks</tt> is required in addition
>> +	      to <tt>Provides</tt>, consider the
>            ^^^^^^^^^
>> +	      case of a file in the package <package>foo</package> being
>> +	      taken over by the package <package>foo-data</package>.
>> +	      <tt>Replaces</tt> will allow <package>foo-data</package> to
>> +	      be installed and take over that file.  However,
>> +	      without <tt>Breaks</tt>, nothing
>> +	      requires <package>foo</package> to be upgraded to a newer
>> +	      version that knows it does not include that file and instead
>> +	      depends on <package>foo-data</package>.  Nothing would
>> +	      prevent the new <package>foo-data</package> package from
>> +	      being installed and then removed, removing the file that it
>> +	      took over from <package>foo</package>.  After that
>> +	      operation, the package manager would think the system was in
>> +	      a consistent state, but the <package>foo</package> package
>> +	      would be missing one of its files.
>> +	    </footnote>

> Shouldn't this "Provides" be "Replaces"? 

Good catch, fixed.

-- 
Russ Allbery (rra@debian.org)               <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>



Reply to: