Your message dated Fri, 30 Jun 2000 20:04:53 -0600 (MDT)
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#66533: apt: Problem with virtual package dependencies
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.
(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what I am
talking about this indicates a serious mail system misconfiguration
somewhere. Please contact me immediately.)
Darren Benham
(administrator, Debian Bugs database)
--------------------------------------
Received: (at submit) by bugs.debian.org; 30 Jun 2000 15:02:55 +0000
>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Fri Jun 30 10:02:55 2000
Return-path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Received: from m2ep.pp.htv.fi (m2.pp.htv.fi) [212.90.64.98]
by master.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.12 2 (Debian))
id 1382Ji-0001EJ-00; Fri, 30 Jun 2000 10:02:54 -0500
Received: from cumulonimbus.pp.htv.fi (cs84178.pp.htv.fi [212.90.84.178])
by m2.pp.htv.fi (8.8.6 (PHNE_14041)/8.8.6) with ESMTP id SAA12554;
Fri, 30 Jun 2000 18:02:22 +0300 (EETDST)
Received: by cumulonimbus.pp.htv.fi (Postfix, from userid 1000)
id E877113EF5; Fri, 30 Jun 2000 18:02:20 +0300 (EEST)
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: apt: Problem with virtual package dependencies
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
X-Mailer: bug 3.3.3
Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2000 18:02:20 +0300 (EEST)
Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Package: apt
Version: 0.3.19
Severity: normal
Apt seems to have problem when there's two (or maybe even more) packages
providing same library package and one of packages is named after that
library these packages provide. Now if some package requires certain
version of the library in question, apt understands that dependency only
if the library is provided by the package named after that library and
tries to replace other packages providing same library.
Good example of this situation is libesd0 and libesd-alsa0: there's for
example package festival, requiring libesd0 >= 0.2.15-7, which results
that apt refuses to use readily installed libesd-alsa0 0.2.18-3 providing
libesd0.
---------------------------------------
Received: (at 66533-done) by bugs.debian.org; 1 Jul 2000 02:04:58 +0000
>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Fri Jun 30 21:04:57 2000
Return-path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Received: from tmmi197-073.telusvelocity.net (wakko.deltatee.com)
[209.115.197.73] (mail)
by master.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.12 2 (Debian))
id 138CeP-000794-00; Fri, 30 Jun 2000 21:04:57 -0500
Received: from localhost (wakko.deltatee.com) [127.0.0.1] (jgg)
by wakko.deltatee.com with smtp (Exim 2.11 #1)
id 138CeL-0007v4-00 (Debian); Fri, 30 Jun 2000 20:04:53 -0600
Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2000 20:04:53 -0600 (MDT)
From: Jason Gunthorpe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
X-Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: Jason Gunthorpe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED]
cc: APT Development Team <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Bug#66533: apt: Problem with virtual package dependencies
In-Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Fri, 30 Jun 2000 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Apt seems to have problem when there's two (or maybe even more) packages
> providing same library package and one of packages is named after that
> library these packages provide. Now if some package requires certain
This is how our packaging system is defined to work, it is not a bug.
Jason
