> > Conflicts: << > > system-tetex, tetex, tetex-nox, ptex, ptex-nox, > > (%type_raw[-nox] = -nox) tetex-base (>= 0), > > (%type_raw[-nox] = .) tetex-nox-base, > > ptex-base (>= 0), ptex-nox-base > > << > > Replaces: << > > tetex, tetex-nox, ptex, ptex-nox, > > (%type_raw[-nox] = -nox) tetex-base (>= 0), > > (%type_raw[-nox] = .) tetex-nox-base, > > ptex-base (>= 0), ptex-nox-base > > << > > > This workaround doesn't work propery. > > (%type_raw[-nox] = -nox) tetex-base (>= 0), > (%type_raw[-nox] = .) tetex-nox-base, > > are not necessary in tetex[-nox]'s Conflicts/Replaces, but necessary > in tetex[-nox]-base's Conflicts/Replaces. In addition, the expression > (>= 0) is not needed for ptex-base because ptex[-nox]-base don't > provide ptex-base.
I intended that both tetex[-nox] and tetex[-nox]-base need following items in their Conflicts/Replaces: (%type_raw[-nox] = -nox) tetex-base (>= 0), (%type_raw[-nox] = .) tetex-nox-base tetex[-nox]-base's Conflicts/Replaces are usual. Additional tetex[-nox]'s Conflicts/Replaces are hacks. Whether the "(>= 0)" for ptex-base is required or unnecessary depends on whether ptex[-nox]-base contains ptex-base in Provides. If your ptex[-nox]-base does not have ptex-base in Provides, you are right. > * my patch > OK: tetex, tetex-base <-> ptex, ptex-base Really? I cannot believe that I can change packages in "<-" direction. Can you show me your ptex.info? ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by xPML, a groundbreaking scripting language that extends applications into web and mobile media. Attend the live webcast and join the prime developer group breaking into this new coding territory! http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=110944&bid=241720&dat=121642 _______________________________________________ Fink-devel mailing list Fink-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-devel
