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

Bug#80573: should replace grafix

On 00-12-27 Peter Palfrader wrote:
> On Wed, 27 Dec 2000, James LewisMoss wrote:
> > Package: grafix-dev
> > Version: 1.6-1
> > Severity: normal
> > 
> > or maybe conflict.  dunno.  anyway.  here's log.

> [Summary for people on -qa:
>  old package: grafix
>  new packages: grafix1 (Replaces: grafix)
>                grafix-dev (Depends: grafix1)
> ]

> grafix-dev should conflict with grafix, (at least this is what
> I think currently :-).

No, I think those files that are in both package, should only be in one
package. I think the -dev package would be the appropriate one. 

> But I have another question I hope people on -qa can answer:

> How is upgrading supposed to work?
> Let's say I have grafix installed and run an apt-get dist-upgrade.
> IMHO it should upgrade grafix to grafix1, but I could not get it
> to work with several mixes of Conflicts, Replaces and Provides.

You need to have a "Replace: grafix" and a "Conflicts: grafix".
"Provides" is useful for virtual package but not for upgrading. 

> Perhaps we need an updated (and empty) binary grafix that depends
> on grafix1?  How long would we keep that binary around?

No, that's bad style.

> > Bleh.  paste added spaces at the begining of each line.

> :set noai

vi or vim?

Ein "Nein" ausgesprochen mit der tiefsten Überzeugung ist besser
und größer als ein "Ja" um zu gefallen oder noch schlimmer, um
Schwierigkeiten zu umgehen.
  -- Mahatma Gandhi

Reply to: