On Sat, Jul 01, 2006 at 12:06:16AM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote: > On Fri, Jun 30, 2006 at 08:48:31AM -0400, David Nusinow wrote: > > Would putting back xserver-xfree86 as a transitional package suffice? Since > > I don't know how to reproduce this problem locally, my best guess is that > > the server gets removed due to the conflict with x11-common and then > > nothing is able to install the new one because xserver-xorg doesn't exist > > to be marked for upgrade. Putting back an empty xserver-xfree86 that pulls > > in xserver-xorg should suffice in this corner case, letting us remove the > > note all together. > > It is still valid for aptitude to remove xserver-xfree86, even as a > transitional package, if the old version is conflicted with. There's > nothing in our packaging system that lets you mark a particular package as > "not to be removed on upgrade". A dummy xserver-xfree86 package may fix > this for most users, though.
Bugreport #372077 has now this information also. I hope this helps, Geert Stappers -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]