On Fri, Apr 04, 2003, Michael Schloh von Bennewitz wrote:
> >Why do they conflict? Sure, both provide DNS, but a Conflicts: header
> >should be IMHO only applied if _FILES_ of two packages conflict. Not if
> >the purpose of the package conflicts. Same for teapop IMHO!
> >
> Like I said, I'm happy to change the policy if you want to redefine the
> purpose of our 'Provides' and 'Conflicts' fields. So I assume your vote is to
> ignore the 'Provides' field, and mark conflicts only to packages with
> conflicting files. That would be two and a half votes then.
IMHO "Provides" is a high-level/purpose/feature-set thing meaning
another package can _USE_ any package which provides the feature.
"Conflicts" is a low-level/files-related thing meaning only one package
at a time can be _INSTALLED_ within a single OpenPKG instance. Hence I
vote for backing out the bind, teapop, etc. patches from today.
Ralf S. Engelschall
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
www.engelschall.com
______________________________________________________________________
The OpenPKG Project www.openpkg.org
Developer Communication List [EMAIL PROTECTED]
