Your message dated Mon, 29 Jan 2007 09:55:41 -0700
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#403626: libisccfg1 should Replaces: libisccfg0 (and
Conflicts: libisccfg0)
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.
(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what I am
talking about this indicates a serious mail system misconfiguration
somewhere. Please contact me immediately.)
Debian bug tracking system administrator
(administrator, Debian Bugs database)
--- Begin Message ---
Package: libisccfg1
Severity: normal
libisccfg1 seems to replace libisccfg0, but when upgrading from Sarge to
testing libisccfg0 is not beeing removed, resulting in an orphaned
remaining libisscfg0 package. This situation could be handled by adding
these fields to debian/control:
Replaces: libisccfg0
Conflicts: libisccfg0
I found this reverese dependencies for the package:
Reverse Depends:
lwresd,libisccfg0
libbind-dev,libisccfg0 1:9.2.4-1sarge1
bind9,libisccfg0 1:9.2.4-1sarge1
bind9,libisccfg0
But they seem not to exist in Etch anymore.
This will force the removal of the old, orphaned libisscfg0 package.
Best Regards
Patrick
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
On Mon, Dec 18, 2006 at 03:58:58PM +0100, schönfeld / in-medias-res.com wrote:
> Package: libisccfg1
> Severity: normal
>
> libisccfg1 seems to replace libisccfg0, but when upgrading from Sarge to
> testing libisccfg0 is not beeing removed, resulting in an orphaned
> remaining libisscfg0 package.
Not a bug. Both libisccfg0 and libscccfg1 can coexist on a system,
satisfying dependencies for different packages that use the two
different APIs. That's _WHY_ the package name changes to reflect the
soname.
lamont
--- End Message ---
