On Fri, Mar 09, 2007 at 01:37:14AM -0500, Eric Dorland wrote: > * Steve Langasek ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > > On Thu, Mar 08, 2007 at 04:28:30AM -0500, Eric Dorland wrote: > > > I have a few minor fixes in packages that are in unstable right now > > > that while not release critical, I think would be helpful to have in > > > the next release. I've attached patches below for ease of reviewing.
> > > automake 1:1.4-p6-11 -> 1:1.4-p6-12 > > > This just removes the provides of automake, since we're moving away > > > from supporting automake 1.4, and also adds a versioned conflict on > > > automake, which allows automake1.4 and the new automake package be > > > able to be installed at the same time, which would be good. Low risk. > > Four packages in testing build-depend on automake[1]. Do you know which > > version they build with? > > Granted, the current situation means that the resolution of the build-dep > > may be non-deterministic; but it might instead be deterministic but > > non-obvious, in which case this change would introduce 4 RC bugs... > Well don't the buildds and other tools always prefer a real package > over a Provides? They'll do whatever apt-get does. Is it the case that apt-get always prefers a real package? If so I have no problem unblocking this. Thanks, -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.debian.org/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
