On Fri, Feb 27, 2009 at 10:37:19AM +0100, Adam Borowski wrote: > On Thu, Feb 26, 2009 at 11:51:39PM -0800, Steve Langasek wrote: > > On Thu, Feb 26, 2009 at 03:42:39PM +0100, Holger Levsen wrote: > > > But as this would hardcode exim4 as the default MTA for Debian in a number > > > of packages, some better solutions have been proposed in > > > http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2008/05/msg00381.html with the best > > > choice appearantly being <87ve1faria....@frosties.localdomain> which > > > proposes that exim4 should provide default-mta, packages needing an MTA > > > should depend on default-mta | mail-transfer-agent and the other MTAs > > > should > > > provide mail-transfer-agent. Then, if we want to change the default, we > > > just > > > need to touch two packages.
> The referred post mentions an actual package rather than just a "provides:" > field. No, not the Message-Id that Holger referenced. http://lists.debian.org/msgid-search/87ve1faria....@frosties.localdomain > It makes a difference. Yes, it does; and that thread identified what the differences are that should cause us to prefer a virtual package instead of a real one. http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2008/05/msg00390.html > Assume that in squeeze, the default changes to exim5. With an actual > pseudopackage, someone having both lenny and squeeze (or unstable) in apt's > sources will have default-mta either from lenny (->exim4) or from squeeze > (->exim5). > With mere "provides:" (a virtual package), you'd have a version of both > exim4 and exim5 that provides default-mta. And what problem do you believe the latter will cause, in practice? -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. Ubuntu Developer http://www.debian.org/ slanga...@ubuntu.com vor...@debian.org -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-policy-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
