On Fri, Oct 08, 1999 at 01:24:34PM -0700, Sean 'Shaleh' Perry wrote:
>
> On 08-Oct-99 David Coe wrote:
> > Ben Darnell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >
> >
> > [...]
> >
> >> In the previous package, a tcl script
> >> was left in the pilot-link package, which made it depend on tcl/tk and
> >> therefore X. I want to move this file to pilot-link-tcl, and have done
> >> so by placing the filename in debian/pilot-link-tcl.files. The problem
> >> is that when I upgrade to the new packages, the installation of
> >> pilot-link-tcl fails unless the new pilot-link has already been
> >> installed, because the script exists in both the old pilot-link and the
> >> new pilot-link-tcl.
> >
> > [...]
> >
> > I *think* if you say ``Replaces: pliot-link'' (but not Conflicts:)
> > in pilot-link-tcl, it'll allow pilot-link to replace some of the
> > other package's files.
> >
>
> You want to do a version replaces. 'Replaces: pilot-link (<< 0.9.1)'.
>
I think this part aren't clear around. For me, the solutions would be:
Package: pilot-link
Version: 0.9.1-2
Suggests: pilot-link-tcl [because it's a good add-on to pilot-link]
Package: pilot-link-tcl
Version: 0.9.1-2
Conflicts: pilot-link (<< 0.9.1-2) [because older ones share the same file]
Replaces: pilot-link (<< 0.9.1-2) [because it provides some functionnality
of the old one].
Consequences: pilot-link-tcl is selected because of the Replaces,
pilot-link is upgraded because of the Conflicts,
pilot-link-tcl is installed and everyone is happy.
However, for a two packages who just exchange some files (examples,
some file moving pack to pack-doc, pack-doc being an already existing
package).
Package: packA
Version: with.no.file-new
[ can also Suggests: packA-doc but it's not mandatory ]
Package: packA-doc
Version: with.file-new
Conflicts: packA-doc (<< with.no.file-new) [because of the shared files]
[ But no replaces since packA-doc doesn't replaces any functionnality
from packA ]
I think (no test) that adding a Replaces on this case will install
packA-doc (with.file-new) even if it's not installed before the upgrade.
Not putting it just make want the user want: upgrade packA, period.
All IMHO. I would really appreciate if someone can point me to some
more detailed explanation (maybe I misread the packaging-manual?).
Thanks,
--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fabien Ninoles Chevalier servant de la Dame Catherine des Rosiers
aka Corbeau aka le Veneur Gris Debian GNU/Linux maintainer
E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
WebPage: http://www.tzone.org/~fabien
RSA PGP KEY [E3723845]: 1C C1 4F A6 EE E5 4D 99 4F 80 2D 2D 1F 85 C1 70
------------------------------------------------------------------------
