On Tue, 2005-08-09 at 15:11 +0900, Horms wrote: > On Tue, Aug 09, 2005 at 07:56:13AM +0200, Bastian Blank wrote: > > On Mon, Aug 08, 2005 at 10:31:31PM -0600, dann frazier wrote: > > > Why not use linux-image-foo instead of kernel-image-foo, w/ an > > > appropriate Replaces/Conflicts/Provides? > > > > This is not an appropriate upgrade path as this headers don't ask apt to > > install the new package. > > Even with the appropriate Replaces/Conflicts/Provides?
fyi, I was just suggesting this for the -latest packages. Since we wouldn't maintain the old package names, we wouldn't have to epoch. I don't know enough about the headers packages to know if we could do the same thing there. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
