I understand that apt doesn't know anything about packages other than what it't told about dependencies and conflicts.
Let's get to the big picture -- is the doc there to support the use of the binary, or is the binary there to support the use of the doc?
If we can agree that the binary is primary and the doc is secondary, then we should be able to agree that what happened to the original poster should not happen. The question then is what to do about it.
Kevin
What about apache and apache-doc? I could easily see people wanting apache-doc and not caring if apache needed to be removed for apache-doc to be installed. When I first installed spamassassin, it was solely for the documentation and if a spamassassin-doc package had been available than I would have installed that even if it made spamassassin itself uninstallable. Also, I am guessing, but I would guess that sylpheed-doc and old sylpheed really do conflict and it isn't just a question of keeping them in sync[ie they both contain the same file].
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
