On Fri, 24 Sep 1999, Clint Adams wrote: > They both provide httpd; should I file bugs against them demanding that > they conflict with it too?
I think this is a good point; it doesn't seem to be a clear area of policy. It sounds like perhaps some new system needs to be implemented. Perhaps a Suspicious: line in the control file, which will mirror Conflicts:, except only elciiting a warning to the user? Or perhaps a simple flag is required to override it? What is wrong with the semantics of `dpkg --force-conflicts' as it stands? That it confuses packages like `apt-get', whinging about broken packages, or some other reason? I think any deeper idea (such as a database of `claimed' ports in /etc, or something) would be ugly, and best avoided in the name of non-intervention. -- Chris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ( http://www.fluff.org/chris )
