Please do not CC the APT team on follow-ups --- it looks like APT already does the right thing here (sorry for the noise!).
I wrote: > The xz-utils package in experimental Conflicts/Replaces/Provides the > pseudo-essential package lzma. I think this should be fine, since > installing it only involves overwriting the lzma package rather than > removing it. [...] > Am I misunderstanding policy here? I was. Using Conflicts disallows files from xz-utils and lzma from coexisting even during an upgrade, making an upgrade impossible. What I meant to achieve is accomplished with Replaces/Provides without the Conflicts. Once xz-utils has written over all the files of lzma, lzma would be marked as uninstalled, so normally the two packages would not be installed at once. But how to ensure all the files of lzma are overwritten, when newer versions could always add more files? I worry because it might be confusing to a system administrator to see the lzma package installed when most of its important files are provided by another package. Such an administrator might blame bugs in xz-utils on the lzma package. Advice? Thanks, Jonathan -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-rc-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
