Package: dpkg
Version: 1.15.5.6
Currently, dpkg treats Breaks just like Conflicts.
For example, let’s say you have foo/1.0 and bar/1.0 installed.
You prepare bar/2.0 which Breaks: foo (<< 2.0)
and foo/2.0 which Breaks: bar (<< 2.0)
(This is what happened to gnome-keyring, in which the communication
protocol between the daemon and the library had changed.)
Now if you run “dpkg -i bar_2.0_all.deb foo_2.0_hurd-i386.deb”, the
packages will refuse to upgrade, just as if there were conflicts.
And similarly to conflicts, APT will have to deconfigure one of the two
before upgrading the other.
This makes the whole Breaks: idea useless. AFAIR, this field was
designed to handle precisely such cases, where there are no file
conflicts, to make them easier to handle than Conflicts:.
I think the correct behavior is to not look at Breaks: at all at the
unpack phase, and to only do it at the configure phase. If a package for
which a Breaks has been set has not been upgraded, dpkg should refuse to
configure just as if there were a missing dependency.
Cheers,
--
.''`. Josselin Mouette
: :' :
`. `' “A handshake with whitnesses is the same
`- as a signed contact.” -- Jörg Schilling
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
