Hi there! On Wed, 15 Sep 2010 16:30:34 +0200, Michael Gilbert wrote: > On Wed, 15 Sep 2010 13:49:33 +0200, Luca Capello wrote: [why I think the situation like it is is broken] > i understand your perspective. however, i personally don't see a > problem. i am willing to accept a patch as long is it doesn't involve > reintroducing the xpdf-common transitional package (i.e. getting > breaks/conflicts right so its automatically removed).
Then I guess that, as I already suggested, you should close the bug as wontfix, I expressed my ideas and, sorry, I still do not agree on yours. BTW, while I can do that, I think that the wontfix tag is a maintainter's prerogative. On Mon, 27 Sep 2010 22:22:27 +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote: > On Tue, Sep 14, 2010 at 06:15:19PM +0200, Luca Capello wrote: >> I guess there is something wrong with the transition from >> xpdf-[common|reader|utils] to xpdf. Indeed, both xpdf-reader and >> xpdf-utils have an appropriate dummy transitional package, while >> xpdf-common does not. Or, better, it had it, but then it was removed >> when trying to solve #589425. Please note that the problem is exactly >> the same as Adrian Bunk (cc:ed) suggested in: >> >> http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=589425#20 > > It's not exactly the same. Conceptually, yes: - xpdf-reader was merged in xpdf, thus the old xpdf-reader package must Depends: on xpdf. - xpdf-common was merged in xpdf, thus the old xpdf-common package must Depends: on xpdf. I do not see any differences in the two situations above. >> First, the new xpdf package overwrite files belonging to the old >> xpdf-common package, and while this seems to be OK, it should be avoided >> (given that this is a simple transition). > > Overwriting the files is correct, and anyway not easily avoidable. It is avoidable if xpdf-common is a dummy transitional package: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=589425#5 And for the conffiles, we have different ways to deal with them, both manual and "automatic" <http://wiki.debian.org/DpkgConffileHandling>. >> Second, the xpdf-common package is left installed and it is not >> automatically removed, which means that the other configuration files in >> /etc/xpdf (xpdfrc-arabic, xpdfrc-cyrillic, xpdfrc-greek, xpdfrc-hebrew, >> xpdfrc-latin2, xpdfrc-thai and xpdfrc-turkish) are left installed as >> well, with the user noticing nothing about that. >> >> The correct solution is to also provide a transitional xpdf-common >> package, please do that. >>... > > I'd say the xpdf package should get a conflict with xpdf-common to force > its removal. > > Is there any situation where this wouldn't solve anything you describe? I think I repeated it too many times: this is a workaround, not the *proper* package workflow I described above. Anyway, it seems I am the only one who cares about this issue, so let us stop discussing it. And this mail will be the last one about this bug. Thx, bye, Gismo / Luca
pgpKpwZfsW5iq.pgp
Description: PGP signature
