Re: lmodern fonts and sarge
Florent Rougon <f.rougon@free.fr> schrieb:
> frank@kuesterei.ch (Frank Küster) wrote:
>
>> Fine. It seems that dpkg now in which order to unpack packages. So it's
>> fine with lmodern.
>
> I think it is actually apt that knows.
You're probably right.
>> And this means that in this other case, arabtex, we needn't be afraid of
>> doubled dist-upgrade runs, or doubled debconf phases. It will just go
>> smoothly if tetex Conflicts with arabtex <= 3.10-5.
>
> *If* the new version of arabtex can be unpacked while the old tetex is
> still here. Remember:
> 1. old arabtex & old tetex are installed
> 2. Unpacking new arabtex...
> 3. Unpacking new tetex...
The new arabtex only contains one file (or rather directory) less than
the old. And new tetex contains one link more than the old, the same
file.
> You have to make sure that 2 will work.
It will. (I believe, and am currently testing)
> "The new arabtex can be unpacked
> while tetex 1 is installed" is easier to achieve than "the new arabtex
> must work with tetex 1"
yes, but there's no use in making sarge's arabtex work with woody's
tetex, is it?
> and would be sufficient for all this to work, I
> think. But in this case, the new arabtex should not forget to depend on
> tetex-* (>= 2).
No. If the buggy arabtex is still installed while new tetex is being
unpacked, we get the stopper. If new tetex conflicts with too-old
arabtex, it will work.
Regards, Frank
--
Frank Küster, Biozentrum der Univ. Basel
Abt. Biophysikalische Chemie
Reply to: