Hi Tim,

On Mon, Feb 20, 2017 at 11:38:29PM +0000, Potter, Tim wrote:
> On 18 Feb 2017, at 5:33 AM, Evgeni Golov <evg...@debian.org> wrote:
> > Can we in the meantime have proper Breaks in place, so that people don't 
> > accidentally update runc without docker/containerd/etc?
> 
> Hi Evgeni.  Thanks for the reply.  I had totally missed the fact that people 
> could be
> doing individual package upgrades of runc (also containerd) and this would 
> muck up
> the docker.io package.
> 
> What particular Break lines would you think appropriate for this situation?  
> My initial
> guess would have been adding Depends = in docker.io, containerd and runc to
> ensure that everything is upgraded in lockstep, but I don't see where Breaks 
> can
> be applied.

I would have suggested adding "Breaks: docker.io (<< 1.12)" to both runc
and containerd, as upgrading both (separately and together) breaks
Docker in sid atm.

Not sure how you want to add a Depends with = here, as that would mean
you need to maintain those entries on each and every upload of the
packages, which does not seem practicable (and would not fix the current
docker.io package in sid).

Regards
Evgeni

_______________________________________________
Pkg-go-maintainers mailing list
Pkg-go-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-go-maintainers

Reply via email to