Re: About the Breaks: field.
On 10 Oct 1997, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> Firstly, there is the technical aspect of assuring that the package
> management system has a methodology of preventing incompatible
> packages from being installed at the same time. We already have one;
> it is called conflicts. There is no need to implement a separate
> mechanism called breaks which behaves in exactly the same manner.
As Guy already pointed out they do not behave exactly the same manner.
> The second problem is one of knowing exactly what are the conlicting
> packages. In the case of libc6, I think it is asking a lot of the
> libc6 maintainer to ask him to list all packages that may break with
> libc6 initially.
>
> Of course, now that we know what breaks, maybe we should
> investigate whether it is feasible to create an updated libc6 package
> that conflicts with packages << fixed versions.
>
> Note that this could not be done until fixed packages were
> created.
Why shouldn't this be done? If you don't do it you can still install libc6
and have broken packages. If libc6 really breaks incompatible packages,
libc6 should conflict with them no matter if there is a non-conflicting
version or not.
Remco
--
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org .
Trouble? e-mail to templin@bucknell.edu .
Reply to: