Atsuhito Kohda <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > From: Hilmar Preusse <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: Bug#241089: Old cruft in Conflicts-lines > Date: Tue, 30 Mar 2004 19:33:23 +0200 > >> Hi, > > Hi, > >> tetex-bin (and tetex-base) have long Conflicts- and >> Replaces-lines[1], which might originate form the time of the >> non-teTeX to teTeX migration. As this was <=4 releases ago and a >> smooth upgrade from pre-hamm to >=sarge will be quite impossible >> these lines could be taken out without harm. > > Well, to avoid confusion, > >> [1] e.g.: Conflicts: texbin, xdvik, mflib, kpathsea, makeindex, >> ps2pk, latex > > the above entries really originate from pre-hamm packages.
I have removed them. Replaces additionally has "texidoc". This was once created from the texinfo sources, but unfortunately the changelog doesn't tell when the packages vanished. Does anybody know? >> nextawg (<= 0.5.1-34), nextaw (<< 0.8-2) > > nextawg, and nextaw would originate from tetex in potato > (not sure but perhaps), i.e. because of a bug of xdvi with > nextaw as far as I remembered. Removed too. >> dvipdfm, alml >> (<< 2002.08.29-4), jbibtex-bin (<< 3.0.5+0.04-2), jtex-bin (<= >> 1.8-5.1), passivetex (<< 1.21-5), ptex-bin (<< 3.0.5+0.04-2), xmltex >> (<< 1.9-4), cweb, tetex-base (<< 2.0.2-6) > > These are necessary for woody (or at least potato) to sarge > upgrade. Some are included in teTeX 2.0 and others are for > compatibility with update-texmf etc. scripts. Since we are also providing sarge backports, I'll leave these (except cweb and tetex-base) in until security support for oldstable is dropped. I don't think we need to support upgrades from woody after that time. Provides also has been stripped to "dvipdfm, cweb, texdoctk"; they can be dropped from here and Replaces at the same time, I guess. Regards, Frank -- Frank Küster Inst. f. Biochemie der Univ. Zürich Debian Developer
