On Tue, 15 Sep 2009, Aleksey Midenkov wrote: > Guys! Placing some hints on dpkg about packages that may be broken is > wrong. Imagine that count of such packages is infinity, so you will > be keep putting all them inside dpkg control info? This is an > abstraction and the next is reality. You fixed a lot of good bugs but > made an requirement of switching from KDE 3 to KDE 4. Not everyone > believe that KDE 4 is better and such requirement is somehow clumsy > because the reason of it lies in some insignificant (by the > comparison with the topic of KDE version switching) busyness with > install-info. Please, be fair!
If you managed to put konqueror on hold, you can surely do the same for dpkg. Sid evolves, if you don't want use newer software, then don't use sid (hint: KDE4 replaces KDE3 in sid). > > It doesn't pull anything new, it just forces the upgrade of what's > > already installed if you have packages that have not been > > transitionned to the separate install-info package. > > So, I required to go to KDE 4 from KDE 3 just because of some obscure > install-info that dpkg needs? If you use sid yes, you can also decide to not upgrade dpkg or to rebuild a patched dpkg that doesn't have the breaks relationship. > Maybe it will be better to make it to live peacefully with old packages? It does live peacefully with old packages, it tells them when a change breaks them so that the user doesn't experience the breakage. That said, the kind of breakage related to install-info is only of the sort "my info page is not listed in the index". I agree it's not an important breakage but I don't see a good reason to revert the change. If KDE 4 doesn't suit you, you'd better file bugs on it so that it can be usable for you when squeeze gets out. Cheers, -- Raphaƫl Hertzog -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-dpkg-bugs-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org