On Wed, 2005-08-10 at 07:50 +0200, Sven Luther wrote: > On Tue, Aug 09, 2005 at 05:21:37PM -0600, dann frazier wrote: > > On Tue, 2005-08-09 at 21:04 +0200, Bastian Blank wrote: > > > On Tue, Aug 09, 2005 at 03:11:37PM +0900, Horms wrote: > > > > On Tue, Aug 09, 2005 at 07:56:13AM +0200, Bastian Blank wrote: > > > > > This is not an appropriate upgrade path as this headers don't ask apt > > > > > to > > > > > install the new package. > > > > Even with the appropriate Replaces/Conflicts/Provides? > > > > > > Okay, we have kernel-image-$foo installed. Now we get a new package: > > > | Package: linux-image-$foo > > > | Replaces: kernel-image-$foo > > > | Conflicts: kernel-image-$foo > > > | Provides: kernel-image-$foo > > > > > > What does apt do? > > > > If apt sees that foo is installed on a system and > > foo 2.0.1-1 is available > > bar 1.0-1 is available, and provides/conflicts/replaces foo > > > > An apt-get dist-upgrade should remove foo and install bar. > > > > See http://www.debia.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-relationships.html - > > section 7.5.2 > > Yeah, but kernel-latest provided version numbers starting with 100, so ...
The version number doesn't appear to matter. I created a bogus deb called goodbye that provides/conflicts/replaces hello. I tried giving it a version < the installed hello, and a version > than the installed hello. In both cases, an apt-get dist-upgrade did not automatically pull in goodbye. In both cases, an apt-get install goodbye did remove hello. So; Replaces isn't enough of a hint to make this transition happen automatically. I looked at ssh, and it uses a transititional package as well. Anyway; here's another suggestion. Since binary packages don't have to have the same version as the source package, how about we give the transitional packages a large version for now. After etch, we can drop these packages and go back to all packages having the same (non-epoched) version. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
