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

Bug#383215: marked as done (x11-common: xephem package has stuff in /usr/X11R6/bin/, add conflicts?)

Your message dated Tue, 15 May 2007 08:41:41 +0200
with message-id <46495625.3000804@ens-lyon.org>
and subject line Bug#383215: x11-common: xephem package has stuff in /usr/X11R6/bin/, add conflicts?
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.

This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.

(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what I am
talking about this indicates a serious mail system misconfiguration
somewhere.  Please contact me immediately.)

Debian bug tracking system administrator
(administrator, Debian Bugs database)
--- Begin Message --- 
Package: x11-common
Version: 1:7.0.23
Priority: wishlist

The 'xephem' package from oldstable (and probably others) installed stuff
at /usr/X11R6/bin/ and, since it is not present in sarge (or etch) it will
break upgrade installations from users. Actually, as I described in #362996
such an upgrade is difficult to recover from (if you are a novice user and
launching the upgrade with an X display).

Since the wiki asks people to submit bugs to packages that have not
transitioned I'm doing so with this package (the only one I had installed
which had not transitioned yet).  I don't know if the idea is to add all
these possible packages into dependencies to x11-common but, if so, it would
be great if the X team would 

a) extract a list of all packages in stable / old-stable which installed
stuff in /usr/X11R6/bin/
b) determine which of those packages still have stuff there
c) add those packages to the list of dependencies in x11-common

If not, it would be great if, once polished, the information at
http://wiki.debian.org/Xorg69To7 was rewritten to be used as a section on the
future release notes (sarge->etch) and submitted as a followup to #362996.

Thanks

Javier

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature


--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message --- 
Version: 1:7.1.0-7

Closing since we have this conflict now.

Brice

--- End Message ---
Reply to: