[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: SVN tetex commit: r150 and r151



On 27.09.05 Frank Küster (frank@debian.org) wrote:
> Hilmar Preusse <hille42@web.de> wrote:
> > On 26.09.05 Frank Küster (frank@debian.org) wrote:
> >> Hilmar Preusse <hille42@web.de> wrote:

Hi all,

> >> > in these two commits one ls-R file moved from tetex-base to
> >> > tex-common.
> >> >
> >> > 1. In tetex-base there is no changelog entry yet.
> >> 
> >> Thanks for spotting this.  Do you keep a list?  Those changes where
> >> somewhen in August!
> >> 
> > It hit me when I tried to upgrade to the latest teTeX 3.0 package
> > from experimental. Then I started looking at the SVN and found no
> > entry in the changelog although it was fixed.
> 
> So you mean there actually is a problem?
> 
Well, it was at the time when I tried to upgrade from something like
tetex-base 3.0-3 to the most recent one. I could not install the
latest tex-common together with the old version as both contain the
soft link /usr/share/texmf/ls-R.

> > I still don't understand when one have to use Conflicts and when
> > to use Replaces.
> 
> I was thinking that we need nothing of that sort at all.  If you
> encountered problems, we probably do.
> 
To make it completely clean tex-common 0.7 should conflict with a
tetex-base still containing the link.

H.
-- 
Drunks are rarely amusing unless they know some good songs and lose a
lot a poker.
		-- Karyl Roosevelt
  http://www.hilmar-preusse.de.vu/



Reply to: