On 24-08-13 13:46, Tomasz Buchert wrote: > > Hi, > I had no idea what subject to pick up. I hope > it will attract somebody. :D > > I have a source package (stellarium FYI) and I want to > create a new source package that contains packages that > will be *optional* for stellarium (stellarium-stars, i.e., > additional stars for stellarium). The additional star > packs don't change very often and therefore I would prefer > to keep them separate from stellarium source package for the sake > of simplicity and more meaningful version numbering. > > The problem is that, even though they are optional, a particular > version of stellarium may require a particular version of star packs. > > For example, assume we have the following packages installed: > > stellarium-1.0 > stellarium-stars-4.0 > > Now we install stellarum-2.0 and we have: > > stellarium-2.0 > stellarium-stars-4.0 > > However, the version 2.0 changed format or something and will not work > properly > with stellarium-stars-4.0 and requires, say, a version 5.0 of stars. > > How can I model this using package relationships? The closest one I see is > "Conflicts: stellarium-stars (<= 4.0)" in stellarium's 2.0 control file. > Is there a better way?
Conflicts is too strong: "When one binary package declares a conflict with another using a Conflicts field, dpkg will refuse to allow them to be unpacked on the system at the same time. ". Please read the policy 7.3 and 7.4 [1]. I think Breaks is what you want. Paul [1] http://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-relationships.html#s-breaks
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
