On Fri, Feb 15, 2002 at 01:01:47AM +0100, Wichert Akkerman wrote: > Previously Martin Quinson wrote: > > It seems bad to me: It's a kind of dependency there, no ? But on the other > > hand, they just depend a recent dpkg to be installed, not to be used... > > It is a dependency that might not be possible to be resolved by an old > dpkg: if it is a versioned dependency using epochs and you are using an > dpkg which does not support epoch you need an assertion like that. > > At this point in time epochs have been in use for so lang that doing > that assertion check doesn't make any sense anymore though.
It didn't make much sense in maintainer scripts in the first place, unless you implement --assert-running-dpkg-and-installed-dpkg-are-the-same (or a saner implementation of assertions) -- .''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield : :' : http://www.debian.org/ | Dept. of Computing, `. `' | Imperial College, `- -><- | London, UK
