On Wed, 2009-09-23 at 10:51:50 +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
> Magnus Holmgren <holmg...@debian.org> writes:
> > When a binary package is renamed or split, as well as if several packages
> > are
> > merged under a new name, transitional packages are normally created, which
> > depend on the new packages, which in turn Replaces and Conflicts with, and
> > possibly Provides, the old packages. I find those dummy packages as silly
> > to
> > create as to uninstall after upgrading.
>
> Dpkg has the ability to vanish empty packages. A dummy package should
> be completly empty and not even contain a /usr/share/doc/. That way on
> installation the package pulls in its depends and then vanishes. So no
> more need to uninstall after upgrading. This only works if the
> superseeding packages Provide the old one though. Otherwise depends on
> the old package would become unsatisfied.
That's not correct. dpkg only disappears packages that have been
completely replaced while installing other packages. There's two cases
for this:
1. The package to disappear has files that get completely replaced by
the new one. Needs the Replaces field.
2. The disappearing package contains empty directories, and all of
them are shipped as well by the new package. Does not need
Replaces field, because directory takeover is an implicit
Replaces, so this is actually a subcase of 1.
dpkg will never disappear a packages just because it's empty w/o the
previous conditions. And just to clarify, in no case the Provides field
plays any role in the disappearing process.
regards,
guillem
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
