[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Mark W. Eichin) wrote: > Yeah, I got bit by that too, and it took me a while to find that... > maybe we need some sort of "transitional-recommends" field? Something > that is ignored if you are installing the package (to avoid causing > even more pain to dselect users, or something), but noticed on an > upgrade? (obviously it need more subtlety than that, but this might be > a more useful distinction than we've had before for splitting > packages...)
Package splitting has always been a problem with Debian. I would suggest a different solution, namely an "upgrades" field included in the new packages. The idea is that if package A is split into packages B and C, both B and C should include a field upgrades: A in their control file. That way the upgrade procedure would now that in order to upgrade A, both B and C must be installed. I think this idea works for package splitting as well as for package renaming, or combinations of them both. Comments? M. S. ------------ Martin A. Soto J. Profesor Departamento de Ingenieria de Sistemas y Computacion Universidad de los Andes [EMAIL PROTECTED]
