Bug#80573: should replace grafix
On 00-12-27 Peter Palfrader wrote:
> On Wed, 27 Dec 2000, Christian Kurz wrote:
> > On 00-12-27 Peter Palfrader wrote:
> > > On Wed, 27 Dec 2000, Christian Kurz wrote:
> > > > > So does grafix-dev.
> > > >
> > > > But that is not fine. No package should contain any files that are in an
> > > > other package already. So the correct solution is to put those
> > > > conflicting files either in grafix1 or grafix-dev.
> > > That should be fine as grafix is an old package, not?
> > Hm, grafix and grafix-dev are old package and grafix1 and grafix1-dev
> > are new packages?
> no, old package: grafix
> new packages: grafix1 and grafix-dev
> grafix1 and grafix-dev can be installed together (as it should be)
> grafix-dev depends on grafix1
> The only problem is that when installing grafix-dev, the old package
> "grafix" might still be installed -> file clash. Therefore grafix1
> as well as grafix-dev should Conflict: grafix.
Are you sure that grafix1 and grafix-dev do not have any files in
common? If yes, your suggestion would be alright.
> > > > > So apt-get dist-upgrade will not catch it and wait until you
> > > > > manually install grafix1 or grafix-dev?
> > > >
> > > > I never used dist-upgrade, so I can't comment on this.
> > > How do you upgrade?
> > apt-get upgrade
> Will "apt-get upgrade" work if the new package only has
> | Replaces: foo
> | Conflicts: foo
> ioe, will it pick up the new package automatically if the old
> one was installed? (it didn't for me although I might have
> screwed up)
Hm, why do you ask me such a question via this mail, when you can get a
faster and better answer via IRC, where some other people can help too?
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