Bug#200264: tetex-bin upgrade fails: conflict with texdoctk
On 14.04.04 Frank Küster (frank@debian.org) wrote:
> Hilmar Preusse <hille42@web.de> schrieb:
> > On 13.04.04 Frank Küster (frank@debian.org) wrote:
Hi,
> >> The alternative would be to swap over these files from tetex-extra
> >> to tetex-bin (not -base, as originally suggested) when swapping the
> >> dependencies.
> >>
> > Dunno, if it is possible to transfer files from one orig.tar.gz to
> > another one. Read: can we transfer files from one orig.tar.gz to the
> > packages of another one?
>
> No, we can't. But we can simply remove them from the deb-file for
> tetex-extra, and manually add them to tetex-bin as a "Debian
> addition". This is just a workaround, with the hope we won't need
> it any more after sarge. Well, hope: We can just decide that in
> this case we won't support upgrades from woody to post-sarge, and
> revert to the current behaviour.
>
> Or we come up with a better splitting scheme after sarge is
> released.
>
We can do the first step into that direction like I suggested in
#190721. The patch there² moves a little bit further in direction of
#223734 and #223728 than it is actually desired. If we split only the
config-files off tetex-extra we shouldn't break anything.
After that we can swap over the mentioned Provide-fields, generate
the necessary Conflict-fields, add at least a Recommend of perl-tk to
tetex-bin and should try to upload the new tetex-base and tetex-bin
simultaneously.
Comments, Suggestions?
> > I guess in tetex-extra are only the dat-files, i.e.:
> >
> > /etc/texdoctk/texdoc-100.dat
> > /etc/texdoctk/texdoc-102.dat
> > /etc/texdoctk/texdocrc
>
> Aha, that's not too big. How come you have texdoc-10{0,2}.dat - I
> only have texdoctk.dat. Is this woody?
>
Yes this is woody. The package is removed, not purged.
Regards,
Hilmar
²
From: Hilmar Preusse <hille42@web.de>
To: 190721@bugs.debian.org
Subject: Bug#190721: splitting of texdoctk is hosed
Date: Thu, 19 Jun 2003 16:56:06 +0200
--
sigmentation fault
Reply to: