Re: For the historians: Do we still need the Conflicts: on tetex-lib?
On 26.03.04 Florent Rougon (f.rougon@free.fr) wrote:
> Frank Küster <frank@debian.org> wrote:
Hi,
> > Hm, we probably should keep it for sarge, because someone might have
> > upgraded from potato to woody incompletely, and left the tetex packages
> > untouched. Is there some policy on that?
>
> AFAIK, the "policy" is that nobody can force you to work in order
> to make direct upgrades from 'release' to 'release' + n with n >= 2
> smooth, but if you want to support that, of course you are free to
> do so.
>
Is that "policy" or common practice? If yes, we could start to clean
these long Conflicts- and Replaces-lines of tetex-bin and tetex-base.
AFAICS they where introduced to guarantee a smooth upgrade from
non-teTeX to teTeX, which was done between pre-hamm and hamm, i.e.
4(!) releases ago. I guess a smooth upgrade from bo (or rex) to sarge
will be quite impossible.
Just my 2¢
H.
--
Choose in marriage only a woman whom you would choose as a friend if she
were a man.
-- Joubert
http://rudi.urz.tu-dresden.de/~hille/
Reply to: