"Eugene V. Lyubimkin" <[email protected]> writes:
> Seconded.
>
> Specifically, Policy now allows use Breaks, not Conflicts if two
> packages has a file conflict. I consider it as a regression - a
> high-level package manager cannot assume anymore that two packages
> having Breaks can be installed (temporarily) without a file conflict,
> and IMO the whole purpose of Breaks (as opposed to Conflicts) is
> defeated.
>
> Please not write policy to reflect currently existing problems in some
> high-level package managers which do wrong thing seeing
> 'Conflicts+Replaces'.
Huh? The presense of Replaces allows the two to be both unpacked. The
Repalces specifically disables the file conflict.
MfG
Goswin
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected]
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/[email protected]
