Carey Evans <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > My preference would be for virtual packages named "python-x.y" to be > the target of the dependency. This seems to me to allow _more_ > flexibility, since _any_ package can then provide the dependency, even > if it can't be named "python" for whatever reason.
And it's shorter for the packag maintainer, and less error prone. > One "apt-cache showpkg python" later... Except for the packages that > depend on "python". Another advantage of the package being > "python2.1" is that these packages don't need to be conflicted with, > if they really mean Python 1.5.2. Please don't introduce the ugly python2.1. Fix the broken packages, and include a Conflicts: in python. Maybe make all packages from the python source make packages python-2.1 etc., and have a meta package that points /usr/bin/pyton to the official version (and similar for other modules from the python source)? /Micce -- Mikael Hedin, MSc +46 (0)980 79176 Swedish Institute of Space Physics +46 (0)8 344979 (home) Box 812, S-981 28 KIRUNA, Sweden +46 (0)70 5891533 (mobile) [gpg key fingerprint = 387F A8DB DC2A 50E3 FE26 30C4 5793 29D3 C01B 2A22]
