Re: Sanity checks in update-fontlang
Norbert Preining <preining@logic.at> wrote:
>> a) acts as update-language if hyphen.d is empty except for 00tex.cnf
>> (which it ships),
>>
>> b) but as the new update-language-* if hyphen.d/ is populated.
>
> Hmm, interesting. But why not
> texlive 2008/9 depends tex-common >= 2.00
> tex-common 2.00 breaks texlive < 2008/9 and probably one or
> two other packages (littex? *cjk)
> That way we don't need to care for that.
>
> It does sound nice, but quite error-prone.
I'm not aware what current recommendations are - aptitude is much more
clever than it or apt-get used to be. But when I became a DD, the
general rule was to avoid versioned Conflicts because they made it
harder for the tools to find an upgrade path, and because the upgrading
order might become seemingly unpredictable (in other words, dependant on
the absence or presence of packages one wouldn't expect to be related).
Of course, Breaks didn't exist back then, but I assumed that the same
holds true for it like Conflicts.
If we go the "Breaks" way, this will probably mean a
"$foo $bar $baz depend on texlive-base, but removing anyway as you request
removing texlive-base (2007.dfsg....)
deconfiguring texlive-base
removing texlive-base-bin (2007.dfsg....)
...
unpacking texlive-base-bin (2008....)
"
which means that if the upgrading process is intercepted between removal
and unpacking (no space left on device, error in some random postinst),
then the user might have lots of broken packages.
Regards, Frank
--
Dr. Frank Küster
Debian Developer (TeXLive)
VCD Aschaffenburg-Miltenberg, ADFC Miltenberg
B90/Grüne KV Miltenberg
Reply to: