On Sun, Feb 05, 2006 at 01:51:48PM -0800, Steve Langasek wrote: > On Sun, Feb 05, 2006 at 07:03:30PM +0100, Daniel Kobras wrote: > > Current dpkg does, but the feature was added post-sarge in 1.13.2. As > > far as I understand, it should only be relied upon post-etch? > > Well, I consider this a bugfix, not a new feature, and don't see a point > here in trying to work around the dpkg bug using Conflicts. YMMV, and it's > your decision to make. For the record, the tradeoff here is that using > Conflicts+Replaces is incorrect per policy and means that it's ok to remove > imagemagick as part of an upgrade -- which apt may attempt to do, or it may > simply bind trying to find an upgrade solution, and neither of those is what > you want. > > I personally think that being able to install sarge packages on top of an > etch system is an order of magnitude less important than installing etch > packages on a sarge system.
I'm quite happy to use the simple Replaces. I was just surprised that using this relatively new features has RM blessing. Regards, Daniel. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
