I have building (source and binary) packages `powstatd' and `powstatd-crypt'. Since they install basically the same file names, the conflicts are currently simply set to:
Package: powstatd-crypt Section: non-US/main/admin Depends: libc6 Conflicts: powstatd, ups-monitor Provides: ups-monitor Package: powstatd Section: admin Depends: libc6 Conflicts: powstatd-crypt, ups-monitor Provides: ups-monitor This means that users get errors when trying to replace `powstatd' with `powstatd-crypt' or the reverse. Should both packages `replace' eachother as well? Or would that confuse apt-get (since they might both be available, or nonj-us might be temporarily unavailable)? Thanks. Peter I wrote: > It's actually _easier_ for me to copy the package I have now to > create a second source package than it would be to modify it to > create two binary packages. So I don't mind going to the two > source packge solution if it solves technical problems. > > I wrote: > > > The next release of powstatd will contain crypto code and will > > produce a crypto pacakge in main/non-us, and a crypto-free > > package in main.
