On Tue, Mar 15, 2005 at 09:22:13PM +0100, Thomas Hood wrote: > On Tue, 15 Mar 2005 10:30:13 +0100, Frank K�ster wrote: > > Thomas Hood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schrieb: > >> Original package is foo 1.0. This is split up into two packages: foo > >> 2.0, bar 2.0. > >> > >> Package: bar > >> Version: 2.0 > >> Conflicts: foo (<< 2.0) > >> > >> Should bar also have this?: > >> > >> Replaces: foo (<< 2.0) > > > > Only if it replaces *files* in foo << 2.0, see > > file:///usr/share/doc/debian-policy/policy.html/ch-relationships.html#s-replaces > > > First of all, thanks for the response. > > My case is a 7.5.2 case, not a 7.5.1 case. bar Conflicts with foo (<< 2.0) > so the meaning of 'Replaces' would be to tell dpkg not to abort when bar > 2.0 is installed and foo 1.0 is already present. > > What I am not sure about is whether adding 'Replaces' would have other > unwanted effects. My understanding is that replaces just sets a flag that allows one package to replace files in another. As long as you have a good reason for them to be swapping file ownership, which you do, then it is all good.
foo-1 gets upgraded to foo-2 foo-2 should depend on bar-2, so users don't think "where the heck did bar go, it *used* to be included in foo!" If some files moved from foo-1 to bar-2 (and AIUI are not in foo-2), then replaces is appropriate; otherwise, dpkg will be installing foo-2 and bar-2, and will notice that /usr/bin/bar used to be in package foo, but it is being overwritten by a file in package bar. Justin -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
