Re: Breaks: instead of Conflicts: for transitional packages

2011-06-22 Thread Vincent Fourmond
On Tue, Jun 21, 2011 at 11:10 PM, Antonio Terceiro wrote: > Vincent Fourmond escreveu isso aí: >>   That also means that we should add this particular feature >> (precedence of the vendor dir over system dir in RUBYLIB path) in >> the Ruby policy. > > Yes, and that the site dir must have precedenc

Re: Breaks: instead of Conflicts: for transitional packages

2011-06-21 Thread Deepak Tripathi
Hi, I think we should implement in gem2deb also. Yes lintian can take care later but if i am using gem2deb with new package it should let me know that where and what i need to fix. I will help new user to contribute more effectively and efficiently. Please note that i am okay with either one.

Re: Breaks: instead of Conflicts: for transitional packages

2011-06-21 Thread Antonio Terceiro
Hello Vincent, Vincent Fourmond escreveu isso aí: > That also means that we should add this particular feature > (precedence of the vendor dir over system dir in RUBYLIB path) in > the Ruby policy. Yes, and that the site dir must have precedence over the vendor dirs. -- Antonio Terceiro http

Re: Breaks: instead of Conflicts: for transitional packages

2011-06-21 Thread Vincent Fourmond
Hi Antonio, On 21/06/11 01:23, Antonio Terceiro wrote: Hi Vincent, Please double check your packages and make sure your new ruby-foo `Breaks: libfoo-ruby, libfoo-ruby1.8` instead of Conflicts: (and make sure that's a versioned Breaks: in the same way we have done until now with versioned Con

Re: Breaks: instead of Conflicts: for transitional packages

2011-06-20 Thread Lucas Nussbaum
On 20/06/11 at 12:45 -0700, Antonio Terceiro wrote: > Antonio Terceiro escreveu isso aí: > > My intuition is that this type of thing should be implemented in lintian > > so that even packages that are not using gem2deb can be checked. > > In time: I intend to at least make gem2deb complain if ther

Re: Breaks: instead of Conflicts: for transitional packages

2011-06-20 Thread Antonio Terceiro
Hi Vincent, Vincent Fourmond escreveu isso aí: > Hello ! > > On Mon, Jun 20, 2011 at 4:59 AM, Antonio Terceiro > wrote: > > I've just updated gen-ruby-trans-pkgs in gem2deb to do The Right Thing, > > and will upload a new version of gem2deb soon. > > Please wait ;-)... Oops, now it's too l

Re: Breaks: instead of Conflicts: for transitional packages

2011-06-20 Thread Vincent Fourmond
Hello ! On Mon, Jun 20, 2011 at 4:59 AM, Antonio Terceiro wrote: > I've just updated gen-ruby-trans-pkgs in gem2deb to do The Right Thing, > and will upload a new version of gem2deb soon. Please wait ;-)... > Please double check your packages and make sure your new ruby-foo > `Breaks: libfo

Re: Breaks: instead of Conflicts: for transitional packages

2011-06-20 Thread Antonio Terceiro
Antonio Terceiro escreveu isso aí: > My intuition is that this type of thing should be implemented in lintian > so that even packages that are not using gem2deb can be checked. In time: I intend to at least make gem2deb complain if there are any FIXME's in debian/*, since those are generated by ge

Re: Breaks: instead of Conflicts: for transitional packages

2011-06-20 Thread Antonio Terceiro
Lucas Nussbaum escreveu isso aí: > On 19/06/11 at 19:59 -0700, Antonio Terceiro wrote: > > Hello all, > > > > These days I noticed that we are using Conflicts: instead of Breaks: in > > our transitional packages, and we should change that. Among other > > reasons, using Breaks: instead of Conflict

Re: Breaks: instead of Conflicts: for transitional packages

2011-06-19 Thread Lucas Nussbaum
On 19/06/11 at 19:59 -0700, Antonio Terceiro wrote: > Hello all, > > These days I noticed that we are using Conflicts: instead of Breaks: in > our transitional packages, and we should change that. Among other > reasons, using Breaks: instead of Conflicts: makes it easier for the > package manager