Hi!
On Wed, 2024-01-03 at 15:04:01 -0700, Sam Hartman wrote:
> > "Guillem" == Guillem Jover writes:
> Guillem> At least the dpkg behavior seems entirely
> Guillem> correct to me and required for safe upgrades (
>
> Can you help me understand the sentence above?
> Where is the case
> "Guillem" == Guillem Jover writes:
Guillem> At least the dpkg behavior seems entirely
Guillem> correct to me and required for safe upgrades (
Can you help me understand the sentence above?
Where is the case where this behavior is needed for safe upgrades?
(I am asking out of
Hi!
On Fri, 2023-12-15 at 16:40:09 +, Sean Whitton wrote:
> On Fri 01 Dec 2023 at 02:11pm +01, Helmut Grohne wrote:
> > §7.4 currently starts with:
> >
> > When one binary package declares a conflict with another using a
> > Conflicts field, dpkg will refuse to allow them to be
Hello,
On Fri 01 Dec 2023 at 02:11pm +01, Helmut Grohne wrote:
> §7.4 currently starts with:
>
> When one binary package declares a conflict with another using a
> Conflicts field, dpkg will refuse to allow them to be unpacked on
> the system at the same time.
>
> I believe this is
Package: debian-policy
Version: 4.6.2.0
X-Debbugs-Cc: debian-d...@lists.debian.org, de...@lists.debian.org
Hi,
first of all huge thanks to David, Guillem and Julian for all of their
explanations. In large parts, this bug report is yours and I'm just the
one writing it down.
§7.4 currently
5 matches
Mail list logo
