[CC -= canonical-launchpad and ubuntu-platform, += debian-release] On Fri, Mar 26, 2010 at 01:01:03PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote: > On Fri, Mar 26, 2010 at 10:22:55AM -0400, Barry Warsaw wrote: > > Salgado: > > > After realizing that's because libparted0 can't be installed and > > searching > > for a bug, I found 537330 which is marked as invalid. Then I tried > > 'aptitude full-upgrade', which tells me libparted1.8-12 is broken and > > should be removed. Maybe I should use only aptitude and not apt-get? > > Known issue caused by reusing an ancient package name (libparted0). Tried > to fix this by adding Conflicts/Replaces the other way, but that didn't > take. Colin, I'm still in favor of making this a 'libparted0debian1' to > side-step this issue (the same change is probably appropriate in Debian - > and we could keep a libparted0 Depends: libparted0debian1 dummy package in > testing/unstable temporarily to smooth the transition)
You may be right (unfortunately), although I think libparted0d would be good enough and would save my poor typing fingers a bit. (There's precedent for that in libavcodec et al.) debian-release, what do you think about this plan, before we finish off the parted transition? I know I tried to resolve this by letting parted 1.8.8.git.2009.07.19-6 into testing first, but if this problem really can't be fixed using Conflicts/Replaces in the other direction, then it's going to cause upgrade problems from lenny to squeeze, and we ought to fix it sooner rather than later. -- Colin Watson [[email protected]] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected] Archive: http://lists.debian.org/[email protected]
