Your message dated Tue, 11 Jul 2006 18:17:46 +0100
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bad idea
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.
(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what I am
talking about this indicates a serious mail system misconfiguration
somewhere. Please contact me immediately.)
Debian bug tracking system administrator
(administrator, Debian Bugs database)
--- Begin Message ---
Package: dpkg
Version: 1.10.15
Severity: normal
IRC transcript:
02:34PM|<Overfiend> My thinking is this: if package to-be-installed A
Conflicts: with package B, why should A need to Replace: B?
02:34PM|<Overfiend> dpkg should ensure that B is removed before unpacking A
02:35PM|<asuffield> one example is that it allows A to pinch config files from B
02:35PM|<asuffield> which can be handy when renaming a package
02:35PM|<Overfiend> but when I pursue that change of reasoning I wonder why we
have Replaces: at all
02:35PM|<Overfiend> asuffield: except we DON'T handle "pinching" of conffiles
02:35PM|<Overfiend> dpkg gets badly confused
02:35PM|<Overfiend> witness upgrades from xlibs 4.2.1 to xlibs-data 4.3.0
02:35PM|<Overfiend> you get prompted for every motherfucking conffile
02:36PM|<asuffield> heh
02:36PM|<Overfiend> which is a lot thanks to XKB
02:36PM|<asuffield> well, it was *supposed* to work. I thought.
02:36PM|<Overfiend> well, it don't. :-P
02:37PM|<doogie> Overfiend: when A conflicts with B, dpkg only ensures that B
is unconfigured before unpacking A
02:37PM|<Overfiend> doogie: I see.
02:37PM|<doogie> and by unconfigured, I mean it only has config-files on the
system
02:37PM|<doogie> which means all it's normal files have been removed.
02:37PM|<Overfiend> doogie: so you would only Conflict: without Replacing: in
the odd case....wait...
02:38PM|<Overfiend> so you only really need Replaces: with Conflicts: when
you're replacing conffiles?
02:38PM|<doogie> there's a slight difference in what I said and what you said
02:38PM|<doogie> you can't replace conffiles(this is considered a dpkg bug)
02:42PM|<Overfiend> doogie: I am wondering why (and when) it is meaningful to
have Replaces: with Conflicts: at all.
02:44PM|<doogie> Overfiend: I don't know
02:44PM|<Overfiend> shit.
02:44PM|<Overfiend> you're the person most familiar with dpkg's internals these
days.
02:44PM|<Qerub> Manoj: Don't mind me - I was probably wrong. I'll beep if I
find out something concrete.
02:44PM|<Overfiend> this is a really fucking dusty corner, then.
02:44PM|<Manoj> Qerub: oh, there is no harm in asking
02:44PM|<Overfiend> I wonder if we can get away with changing Replaces:'s
semantics. Given that they're currently meaningless in this case.
02:44PM|<doogie> no I'm not.
02:45PM|<doogie> the dependency engine isn't something I know.
02:45PM|<Overfiend> I.e., Conflicts+Replaces means "migrating conffile"
02:45PM|<asuffield> Overfiend: Replaces is one of those features which _nobody_
really understands. including iwj.
02:45PM|<Overfiend> doogie: I said what I did because the people (person?) who
know more are not really part of the project anymore.
02:45PM|<asuffield> fuck knows what would happen if we tried screwing with it
02:45PM|<Overfiend> Diziet only pokes his head up to complain that too much is
being asked of him.
02:46PM|<doogie> culus might. but we all know how active culus is
02:46PM|<Overfiend> well, then, I'm going to file a bug.
02:46PM|<Overfiend> so this doesn't get forgotten about
02:47PM|<doogie> Overfiend: pseudo-tag it well
02:52PM|<Overfiend> doogie: what do you want me to call it? DEP? DEPENDS?
DEPENDENCIES?
02:52PM|<doogie> DEP-ENGINE
I'd like to propose that Replaces: be used for conffile migration only.
Any non-conflicting package that would otherwise use Replaces: should
probably be using dpkg-divert instead.
-- System Information:
Debian Release: testing/unstable
Architecture: powerpc
Kernel: Linux redwald 2.4.21-powerpc #1 mar jui 8 19:36:37 CEST 2003 ppc
Locale: LANG=C, LC_CTYPE=en_US.UTF-8
Versions of packages dpkg depends on:
ii dselect 1.10.15 a user tool to manage Debian packa
ii libc6 2.3.2-8 GNU C Library: Shared libraries an
-- no debconf information
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
I just came across this bug report while looking for an existing
report about a bug I've found in Conflicts handling.
There seems to be a lot of confusion here but as far as I can tell the
behaviour that's asked for is that which already exists. I'd also
like to point out that this
<asuffield> Overfiend: Replaces is one of those features which
_nobody_ really understands. including iwj.
is nonsense.
Ian.
--- End Message ---
