On Wed, Apr 07, 2004 at 12:10:56AM -0400, Nathanael Nerode wrote: > > The normal effect of such a conflict is to impose the restriction "you > > can't upgrade hotplug without removing alsa", which I trust most users > > of testing can cope with reasonably when it scrolls across their screen. > > Want to keep alsa? Ok, just don't upgrade hotplug for the time being. > > (IIRC, apt-get upgrade will naturally DTRT here.) > Or rather, "you can't upgrade hotplug without removing alsa -- or upgrading > it first". > The point is that the *current* hotplug in Unstable doesn't have such a > Conflicts:, so it can't very well go in! > So there should be a new hotplug upload with Conflicts: alsa-base << > (appropriate version)? > Or should that be a new alsa-base upload with Conflicts: hotplug << > (appropriate version)?... > Or both?... > Anyway, the packages with Conflicts: have to be uploaded before anything > should be allowed to go in. Given that the current version of hotplug is believed to be fixed, but will still break older versions of alsa-base that don't include a corresponding fix, the hotplug package must have a version conflict with alsa-base. I doubt there's any reason for the alsa-base package to include a versioned conflict with hotplug. It's co-installable just fine with older versions of hotplug, excepting only a very narrow range of hotplug versions that includes the version immediately preceding the one currently in testing. Not only will this not be a problem for users upgrading from stable, it won't affect users following testing, either. -- Steve Langasek postmodern programmer
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature