Raul Miller wrote:
> We'll have to keep around the empty xfnt* packages indefinitely (should they
> need to be created) until a better solution is available, no matter what.
Surely a small set of *empty* packages will not be a great problem
in terms of disk sapce in master.
> I think you missed t
Oops, sorry. Bad formatting, here is the right one:
I have a computer lab with 20 Debian machines. Suppose I want to upgrade
them to slink and I want the new font packages to be installed (like most
people will also want). Do you mean that I should enter dselect and select
them by hand on each of
On Tue, 26 Jan 1999, Branden Robinson wrote:
> I reiterate my challenge. Demonstrate to me a manner in which a
> hamm system upgraded to slink, which keeps the old X font and static
> library packages, will be broken.
Oh, I forgot to tell you something:
I have a computer lab with 20 Debian mach
Santiago Vila <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> With the current state of things, a Debian system which is upgraded by
> dselect from hamm to slink, from slink to potato, from potato to potato+1,
> and from potato+1 to potato+2 may have, say, X version 5.5, and xfonts
> version 3.3.2.3-2.
>
> Do you th
On Tue, 26 Jan 1999, Branden Robinson wrote:
> I reiterate my challenge. Demonstrate to me a manner in which a
> hamm system upgraded to slink, which keeps the old X font and static
> library packages, will be broken.
I hope you will agree that sometimes we have to think about the future.
With
Branden Robinson:
> [...]
> Only now do you seem to be concerned.
No, this has been a frequently asked question for some time in
debian-user. I should probably add it to the Debian FAQ.
Please, note that I'm not blaming you for not having thought about this
problem *in advance*. I just want to se
On Tue, Jan 26, 1999 at 12:42:18PM +0100, Santiago Vila wrote:
> Can you *guarantee* that the package now called xfonts-base will *always*
> have the same functionality and will always be *identical* to the one
> called xfntbase in hamm?
>
> Can you *guarantee* that the package now called xlib6g-s
On Tue, Jan 26, 1999 at 12:42:18PM +0100, Santiago Vila wrote:
> Upgrading a system from hamm to slink should make the system to be in the
> same state as if slink had been installed from scratch.
Indeed. All of my systems have remnants of base and timezone remaining.
(Actually I just discovered t
On Tue, 26 Jan 1999, Avery Pennarun wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 25, 1999 at 02:18:56PM +0100, Santiago Vila wrote:
>
> > On Mon, 25 Jan 1999, Branden Robinson wrote:
> >
> > > You have yet to explain what will BREAK if people continue to use the old
> > > font packages. Not in the future, RIGHT NOW.
>
On Mon, Jan 25, 1999 at 02:18:56PM +0100, Santiago Vila wrote:
> On Mon, 25 Jan 1999, Branden Robinson wrote:
>
> > You have yet to explain what will BREAK if people continue to use the old
> > font packages. Not in the future, RIGHT NOW.
>
> Oh, you have yet to explain why a clock bomb is *not
On Mon, 25 Jan 1999, Branden Robinson wrote:
> You have yet to explain what will BREAK if people continue to use the old
> font packages. Not in the future, RIGHT NOW.
Oh, you have yet to explain why a clock bomb is *not* a bad thing.
"Surely, it will exploit, but not now" ;-)
> How will the up
On Mon, Jan 25, 1999 at 12:59:00PM +0100, Santiago Vila wrote:
> On Mon, 25 Jan 1999, Branden Robinson wrote:
> > Yes, but if it gets to the point where someone else will do it if I don't,
> > then I will do it.
> >
> > I'd still rather we explored alternatives.
>
> I think it got to that point.
On Mon, 25 Jan 1999, Branden Robinson wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 24, 1999 at 12:52:19PM +, Jules Bean wrote:
> > 3) However, if someone were to create xfnt-* packages which *Depend* on
> > the corresponding xfont-* package, then the user will automatically
> > install the new xfont-*, which will in
Quoting Branden Robinson ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
[snip more discussion of xfnt packages]
> I'd still rather we explored alternatives.
For how much longer? I don't think I've heard of anything else that has
a chance of working. (Did I miss something?) Alternatives have been
talked about for a while no
On Sun, Jan 24, 1999 at 12:52:19PM +, Jules Bean wrote:
> 2) Branden doesn't like xfnt-* hanging around. We agree.
I don't just dislike it hanging around on people's machines, I dislike
having to keep the packages around at all, even just as compatibility
packages.
> 3) However, if someone w
Umm..
I still think we're talking at cross-purpose.
1) xfonts-* C/R/P xfnt-*. Yes, I knew this was true. Yes, I knew Branden
knew this :-)
2) Branden doesn't like xfnt-* hanging around. We agree.
3) However, if someone were to create xfnt-* packages which *Depend* on
the corresponding xfont-
On 23-Jan-99, 21:21 (CST), Branden Robinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > 2. Assuming the user does nothing mess with those, they would eventually
> > be shown a Conflict Resolution screen that would show the new xfont-*
> > packages selected and the xfnt-* packages deselected. User should just
>
On Sat, Jan 23, 1999 at 08:32:32PM -0600, Steve Greenland wrote:
> People were discussing the transition from the old layout to new, and
> about upgrading. In particular, the fact that some packages had been
> renamed, in particular xfnt-* -> xfonts-* seemed to make some people
> think that it was
On 23-Jan-99, 18:57 (CST), Branden Robinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In the meantime, please explain this to me.
>
> C/R/P will automatically deinstall the old xfnt packages, WITHOUT
> installing their replacements? Is that true of the old static libs?
No. I think one of us (quite possibly
On Sat, Jan 23, 1999 at 10:11:48PM +, Jules Bean wrote:
> I don't think Branden realised that the conf/repl/prov trick will
> automatically deinstall the xfnt packages. My understanding of his
> objection was the ugliness of having them hang around.
I'm far, far more willing to play games wit
On Sat, 23 Jan 1999, Steve Greenland wrote:
> Why are we going to this trouble? If you want to rename package a1 to a2,
> simply make a2 conflict and replace a1 -- dselect or dpkg will do
> the rest. If you want to make 'upgrade' automatic, then you'll also
> need to upload a new version of the a1
On 23-Jan-99, 14:11 (CST), Raul Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Jonathan P Tomer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > why not just have dummy packages delete themselves in postinst, if we're
> > going to use them?
>
> That can be done.. but it's not quite so simple (dpkg isn't re-entrant
> unless t
On Sat, 23 Jan 1999, Raul Miller wrote:
> (
> until dpkg --remove xfntwhatever; do
> sleep 120
> done >/var/tmp/removexfntwhatever.log 2>&1 &
> )
OK.
We have three solutions suggested now:
a) dummy packages (and live with them)
b) dummy packages, which self-remove
c)
Jonathan P Tomer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> why not just have dummy packages delete themselves in postinst, if we're
> going to use them?
That can be done.. but it's not quite so simple (dpkg isn't re-entrant
unless the nested invocations are read-only). I suppose the trivial
implementation wou
> This means that we're willing to hold off on upgrades to all font packages
> until the relevant apt support for package renaming is ready.
>
> I just hope the rest of the world agrees that this is wise.
it's not. i'm new here, so i'm not sure if this is an old topoic or not, but
debian distribut
On Sat, Jan 23, 1999 at 12:03:55PM -0500, Raul Miller wrote:
> Avery Pennarun <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Because it's such a widespread problem, we can assume that Debian 2.2's
> > version of APT will support package renaming in some way. That means we can
> > actually put off solving this pr
Avery Pennarun <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Because it's such a widespread problem, we can assume that Debian 2.2's
> version of APT will support package renaming in some way. That means we can
> actually put off solving this problem until Debian 2.2, and even longer if
> the X fonts don't change.
On Fri, Jan 22, 1999 at 03:18:51PM +0100, Santiago Vila wrote:
> > Still, it is advisable to install the renamed versions of these packages
> > as soon as is convenient, in the event that their contents do change in
> > the future.
>
> This would just postpone the problem until there is a real di
Shaleh wrote:
>
>On 22-Jan-99 Rafael Kitover wrote:
>> Sorry to jump in like this, but this seems to only be a problem when
>> someone would be using apt-get exclusively. Does xbase recommend the
>> various other packages people expect to have? That would make it simple
>> enough, a per
On 22-Jan-99 Rafael Kitover wrote:
> Sorry to jump in like this, but this seems to only be a problem when
> someone would be using apt-get exclusively. Does xbase recommend the
> various other packages people expect to have? That would make it simple
> enough, a person would then just need to apt-
Sorry to jump in like this, but this seems to only be a problem when
someone would be using apt-get exclusively. Does xbase recommend the
various other packages people expect to have? That would make it simple
enough, a person would then just need to apt-get update;apt-get
dist-upgrade then go into
On Fri, 22 Jan 1999, Branden Robinson wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 22, 1999 at 03:18:51PM +0100, Santiago Vila wrote:
> > I have proposed a very simple solution, which, in addition to the
> > empty xbase (I applaud that you accepted this idea), would make the X
> > upgrades *completely* smooth.
>
> I've
On Fri, Jan 22, 1999 at 03:18:51PM +0100, Santiago Vila wrote:
> I have proposed a very simple solution, which, in addition to the
> empty xbase (I applaud that you accepted this idea), would make the X
> upgrades *completely* smooth.
I've tried to say this more delicately. Obviously that's been
On Fri, 22 Jan 1999, Branden Robinson wrote:
> Just thought I would bring this up one more time and run it by everyone.
> This can be considered a draft of what I'd like to put in the release
> notes.
[...]
> Furthermore, the X font and static library packages have been renamed. The
> following
Just thought I would bring this up one more time and run it by everyone.
This can be considered a draft of what I'd like to put in the release
notes. The person managing that document has my permission to edit this
down a little bit.
***
The Great X Reorganization happened at version 3.3.2.3a-2,
35 matches
Mail list logo