On Tue, Aug 29, 2006 at 01:51:39PM +0200, Magnus Holmgren wrote: > On Monday 28 August 2006 21:06, Steve Langasek took the opportunity to say: > > On Mon, Aug 28, 2006 at 04:01:57PM +0200, Magnus Holmgren wrote: > > > Making mail-transport-agent the empty package, and having it depend only > > > on exim4 (the default), should work. Of course, exim4 can't conflict with > > > it (but it's enough that all the others do),
> > No, that's not enough. The exim4 package has file conflicts with the other > > implementors of m-t-a; there need to be Conflicts declared *directly* > > between exim4 and the others. > So "package-a conflicts package-b" is not the same thing as "package-a > conflicts package-b AND package-b conflicts package-a"? The policy seems to > be > saying that if a package conflicts with another package (asymmetric), then > they can't be installed at the same time (symmetric). What I understood was being discussed was a situation where package-a depends package-b, package-a conflicts package-c, and package-b and package-c have conflicts at the filesystem level. -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.debian.org/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]