Re: renaming a library package (advice and sanity check)

2005-01-16 Thread Jay Berkenbilt
Santiago Vila <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Sat, 15 Jan 2005, Kevin B. McCarty wrote: > > The point I was trying to make is that a libvips-doc which conflicts > and replaces libvips7.10-doc would force the removal of libvips7.10-doc > when doing "apt-get dist-upgrade", . . . I think this may

Re: renaming a library package (advice and sanity check)

2005-01-16 Thread Santiago Vila
On Sat, 15 Jan 2005, Kevin B. McCarty wrote: > Santiago Vila wrote: > > > This way, "apt-get upgrade" will install libvips-doc without requiring > > "apt-get dist-upgrade", and this will be done automatically and > > without user intervention, > > Are you certain of that? My understanding is th

Re: renaming a library package (advice and sanity check)

2005-01-15 Thread Kevin B. McCarty
Santiago Vila wrote: > On Fri, 14 Jan 2005, Jay Berkenbilt wrote: > >> I've read Section 5.9.3 of the developer's reference and understand it >> clearly. Is that still the best way to go? > > Not always, unfortunately. Very often, the upgrade will be smoother if > you use empty dummy packages w

Re: renaming a library package (advice and sanity check)

2005-01-15 Thread Jay Berkenbilt
Santiago Vila <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Fri, 14 Jan 2005, Jay Berkenbilt wrote: > >> I've read Section 5.9.3 of the developer's reference and understand it >> clearly. Is that still the best way to go? > > Not always, unfortunately. Very often, the upgrade will be smoother if > you use emp

Re: renaming a library package (advice and sanity check)

2005-01-15 Thread Santiago Vila
On Fri, 14 Jan 2005, Jay Berkenbilt wrote: > The recent thread on names of library packages on debian-devel made me > decide that I made a mistake in naming one of my packages. > Specifically, the vips7.10 source package creates four binary > packages: libvips7.10, libvips7.10-dev, libvips7.10-too

Re: renaming a library package (advice and sanity check)

2005-01-15 Thread Santiago Vila
On Fri, 14 Jan 2005, Jay Berkenbilt wrote: > Renaming the packages now will create a minor nuisance: the small > number of users of the package will have to learn a new name for the > package, ftp-masters will have to remove these packages that they just > approved, and the vips packages will have

Re: renaming a library package (advice and sanity check)

2005-01-15 Thread Jay Berkenbilt
Jay Berkenbilt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > The recent thread on names of library packages on debian-devel made me > decide that I made a mistake in naming one of my packages. > Specifically, the vips7.10 source package creates four binary > packages: libvips7.10, libvips7.10-dev, libvips7.10-too

renaming a library package (advice and sanity check)

2005-01-14 Thread Jay Berkenbilt
The recent thread on names of library packages on debian-devel made me decide that I made a mistake in naming one of my packages. Specifically, the vips7.10 source package creates four binary packages: libvips7.10, libvips7.10-dev, libvips7.10-tools, and libvips7.10-doc. There's no reason for the