On Tue, Sep 30, 2003 at 05:06:57PM +0200, Michel Dänzer wrote: > As I said before: If the utah-glx packages stop providing the virtual > packages, they must either move the conflicting files or C/R the virtual > packages. There is no realistic scenario where the relations on the > virtual packages aren't sufficient. Well, the maintainer might not do the right thing. I fail to see what harm is caused by my being careful, as long as I declare accurate package relationships. If I do not, bug reports are in order. > > What does libGLU have to do with anything? > > #188737, which the rest of revision 580 works around. Okay. I still don't see why I shouldn't be careful with my packages. I can't control what the utah-glx maintainer does; I can control what I do. I agree that dpkg should do the right thing and not require symmetric Conflicts declarations. Still, I feel I am doing the defensive and robust thing here. -- G. Branden Robinson | You don't just decide to break Debian GNU/Linux | Kubrick's code of silence and then branden@debian.org | get drawn away from it to a http://people.debian.org/~branden/ | discussion about cough medicine.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature