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

Bug#806422: apt: no longer handles mutually-exclusive sets of essential packages well



On Fri, 27 Nov 2015, David Kalnischkies wrote:

> Transitioning from one essential package to another involves some
> packages depending on them, which decide this matter – which is your

No, that cannot be, unversioned Depends on Essential packages
are a Policy violation.

Though I admittedly don’t know how one would transition between
Essential packages while both old and new are available, then.

I wonder if something can be made of the fact that my package
Provides dash in a higher version than dash itself has.

> > Otherwise: would it “fix” the issue if dash-mksh were
> > to ship a preferences.d/ file pinning dash down to -1?
>
> As said: 'the "workaround" is easy enough: pinning',
> so yeah, you could do that.

I’ve done so, and it worked, but it’s not a nice generic fix:
lintian says I’m not allowed to ship a preferences.d file, which
is usually correct, and I need to pin to -1 as even with 1, dash
takes precedence again, so the user would need to manually remove
the preferences.d file before uninstalling dash-mksh (again, not
a problem in this specific case).


Unless you’ve got any idea how this can be handled better,
I think this bugreport can be closed. Thanks for the discussion!

bye,
//mirabilos
-- 
>> Why don't you use JavaScript? I also don't like enabling JavaScript in
> Because I use lynx as browser.
+1
	-- Octavio Alvarez, me and ⡍⠁⠗⠊⠕ (Mario Lang) on debian-devel


Reply to: