On Sun, Mar 2, 2008 at 12:55 PM, Raphael Hertzog <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > The changelog was wrong! It should be of course: > > * (From Ubuntu) Split xscreensaver-gl package into: > > - xscreensaver-gl (standard GL hacks) > > - xscreensaver-gl-extra (GL hacks not installed by default) > > Then xscreensaver-data does not need Replaces: xscreensaver-gl, right? > > Right, then xscreensaver-gl-extra needs a Replaces: xscreensaver-gl (<< > 5.04-3).
> > I have sprinkled on Conflicts and Replaces. Do you think it looks OK > > in the attached control file? I am currently doing upgrade tests, but > > there might be some use cases that I don't catch. > > Why did you add a Replaces: xscreensaver-data (<< 5.04-3) to > xscreensaver-gl? xscreensaver-gl doesn't take over files from > xscreensaver-data since xscreensaver-data is a new package. > > Same for xscreensaver-gl-extra. Ok, makes sense now. -data and -data-extra both replaces files in old xscreensaver -gl-extra replaces files in old -gl > > Does that mean that my Conflicts: xscreensaver (<< 5.04-3) are not good? > > No, it's precisely what we wanted. We want to install xscreensaver-data > only after xscreensaver has been upgraded to the version without the > conflicting files. > > That said, you don't need the conflict *if* the installation of > xscreensaver-data doesn't break previous versions of xscreensaver package > (the scenario is: you run an old version of xscreensaver and you only > install xscreensaver-data (with apt-get install or dpkg -i)... does > xscreensaver still work ?) I think the new xscreensaver-data maybe can coexist with an old xscreensaver, but I don't want anyone to do it, it doesn't make any sense. So I'll keep the Conflicts everywhere. Thanks! Tormod
control
Description: Binary data
