27;t we handle this via transitional firware* non-free packages,
> > > > that depend on bookworm non-free-firmware packages?
> > >
> > > We'd need to add some transitional binary packages for the small
> > > number of n-f-f source packages. That way people
On Mon, Oct 3, 2022 at 11:32 PM Santiago Ruano Rincón
wrote:
> > Can we have different versions in each section?
> >
> > + non-free/pkgA version~1
> > + non-free-firmware/pkgA version~2
>
> that wouldn't comply with the current policy:
> https://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-binary.html#the-
El 03/10/22 a las 19:40, Shengjing Zhu escribió:
> On Mon, Oct 3, 2022 at 7:31 PM Didier 'OdyX' Raboud wrote:
> >
> > 3 octobre 2022 11:11 "Santiago Ruano Rincón" a
> > écrit:
> > > El 02/10/22 a las 20:42, Michael Biebl escribió:
> > >> Am 02.10.22 um 20:14 schrieb Luca Boccassi:
> > >> On Sun,
El 03/10/22 a las 11:31, Didier 'OdyX' Raboud escribió:
> 3 octobre 2022 11:11 "Santiago Ruano Rincón" a écrit:
> > El 02/10/22 a las 20:42, Michael Biebl escribió:
> >> Am 02.10.22 um 20:14 schrieb Luca Boccassi:
> >> On Sun, 2022-10-02 at 10:52 -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> >> In Bullseye we chan
On Mon, Oct 3, 2022 at 7:31 PM Didier 'OdyX' Raboud wrote:
>
> 3 octobre 2022 11:11 "Santiago Ruano Rincón" a écrit:
> > El 02/10/22 a las 20:42, Michael Biebl escribió:
> >> Am 02.10.22 um 20:14 schrieb Luca Boccassi:
> >> On Sun, 2022-10-02 at 10:52 -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> >> In Bullseye w
3 octobre 2022 11:11 "Santiago Ruano Rincón" a écrit:
> El 02/10/22 a las 20:42, Michael Biebl escribió:
>> Am 02.10.22 um 20:14 schrieb Luca Boccassi:
>> On Sun, 2022-10-02 at 10:52 -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
>> In Bullseye we changed the name/syntax for the security repository, and
>> for that a
El 02/10/22 a las 20:42, Michael Biebl escribió:
>
> Am 02.10.22 um 20:14 schrieb Luca Boccassi:
> > On Sun, 2022-10-02 at 10:52 -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
>
> > > will
> > > be very obvious. But if you currently have non-free configured but
> > > don't
> > > add the new firmware section, everyt
Ian Jackson writes:
> Goswin von Brederlow writes ("Transitional packages with conffiles"):
>> Looking into the cause we discovered that the problem is that
>> dhcp3-client is now a transitional package that pulls in
>> isc-dhcp-client. The new package expect
On Wed, Mar 16, 2011 at 02:01:37PM +, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Well surely the question is: why are the files moved to a different
> directory ? Why is the package renamed, even ? Do we need to be able
> to co-install the old and new ISC DHCP clients ?!
The original dhcp-client was version 2. d
Goswin von Brederlow writes ("Transitional packages with conffiles"):
> Looking into the cause we discovered that the problem is that
> dhcp3-client is now a transitional package that pulls in
> isc-dhcp-client. The new package expects its config files in /etc/dhcp
> while
ional package
(which is supposedly 'safe' to do) the replacement package it depended
on becomes a candidate for autoremove.
Does apt do this? Is it even possible for it to recognise
transitional packages, without some unreliable heuristics?
Ben.
--
Ben Hutchings
We get into the habit o
dhcp3-client is now a transitional package that pulls in
isc-dhcp-client. The new package expects its config files in /etc/dhcp
while the old had /etc/dhcp3/. The changes made to the old config no
longer affect the new client.
Which brings me to the subject of this mail:
Transitional packages with
When a binary package simply gets a new name (no splitting or merging
involved), should there *always* remain a dummy/transitional package under
the old name, or are there exceptions where the dummy package is considered
to do more harm (littering, basically) than good, for example -doc packages
> "SZALAY" == SZALAY Attila <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
SZALAY> Okay, okay. Let's be more specific. openssh-client and
SZALAY> openssh-server both Conflicts with ssh (<< 1:3.8.1p1-9)
SZALAY> ntp package also Conflicts with ntp-server package. So I
SZALAY> don't understand how
Hi All,
On Thu, 2006-11-09 at 18:00 +0100, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
>
> Yes, since Replaces can have two possible meanings. Please read the
> Policy document for details.
Okay, okay. Let's be more specific. openssh-client and openssh-server
both Conflicts with ssh (<< 1:3.8.1p1-9)
ntp package als
On Thu, Nov 09, 2006 at 12:45:34PM +0100, SZALAY Attila wrote:
> Hi All!
>
> On Thu, 2006-11-09 at 00:05 +0100, Michael Biebl wrote:
> >
> > If the new package has a "Replaces: old_package", it will *take over*
> > the conflicting config_files from the old package [1].
>
> And there are Packages
Hi All!
On Thu, 2006-11-09 at 00:05 +0100, Michael Biebl wrote:
>
> If the new package has a "Replaces: old_package", it will *take over*
> the conflicting config_files from the old package [1].
And there are Packages with Replaces field filled but Conflicts field
not?
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, ema
On Thu, 09 Nov 2006, Michael Biebl wrote:
> > If this two is true (and I think so) then you couldn't install the old
> > ssh package and the new one. So how can you do this?
>
> If the new package has a "Replaces: old_package", it will *take over*
> the conflicting config_files from the old packag
SZALAY Attila schrieb:
>
> 2) No two package can contain the same _installed_ file.
>
> If this two is true (and I think so) then you couldn't install the old
> ssh package and the new one. So how can you do this?
>
If the new package has a "Replaces: old_package", it will *take over*
the confl
Hi All,
On Tue, 2006-11-07 at 15:33 +0100, Adrian von Bidder wrote:
>
> What happened: Somehow, I seem to have transitioned from sarge ssh to
> openssh-client/-server directly without first installing the 'ssh'
> transitional package because I installed some package which depended on
> openssh
Yodel!
Since I hate having tons of configuration files lying around from my various
tests (and build-dep installing orgies), I do "dpkg -l | grep ^rc | cut -f
3 -d \ | xargs dpkg -P" every now and then. Actually, I first look at the
list, and this proved very important here...
What happened:
21 matches
Mail list logo
