Steve Langasek wrote:
> So I think it's better to say:
>
> This is a stronger restriction than Breaks, which just
> prevents the package listed in the Breaks field from being
> configured while the package with the Breaks field is present on
> the system.
>
> Avoids refer
On Wed, Jul 21, 2010 at 01:37:28PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> >>
> >>When one binary package declares a conflict with another
> >> using a Conflicts field, dpkg will
> >> -refuse to allow them to be installed on the system at the
> >> +refuse to allow them to be unpac
On Mon, Jul 19, 2010 at 07:02:32PM +0100, Hector Oron wrote:
> 2010/7/18 Steve Langasek :
> > I'm puzzled why dpkg needs a unique triplet for a port. dpkg needs to map
> > port names to triplets, but why does it need to do the inverse? And if it
> > doesn't need to map triplet->port, why would t
3 matches
Mail list logo
