Roger Leigh [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Following some discussion with Marco d'Itri about inetd, I'd like to
put forward some more general thoughts on virtual package handling for
some comments.
Currently, virtual packages (such as mail-transport-agent) cannot be
specified by themselves.
On Wednesday 30 August 2006 00:29, Steve Langasek took the opportunity to say:
On Tue, Aug 29, 2006 at 01:51:39PM +0200, Magnus Holmgren wrote:
On Monday 28 August 2006 21:06, Steve Langasek took the opportunity to
say:
On Mon, Aug 28, 2006 at 04:01:57PM +0200, Magnus Holmgren wrote:
On Monday 28 August 2006 21:06, Steve Langasek took the opportunity to say:
On Mon, Aug 28, 2006 at 04:01:57PM +0200, Magnus Holmgren wrote:
Making mail-transport-agent the empty package, and having it depend only
on exim4 (the default), should work. Of course, exim4 can't conflict with
it
On Tue, Aug 29, 2006 at 01:51:39PM +0200, Magnus Holmgren wrote:
On Monday 28 August 2006 21:06, Steve Langasek took the opportunity to say:
On Mon, Aug 28, 2006 at 04:01:57PM +0200, Magnus Holmgren wrote:
Making mail-transport-agent the empty package, and having it depend only
on exim4
Hi folks,
Following some discussion with Marco d'Itri about inetd, I'd like to
put forward some more general thoughts on virtual package handling for
some comments.
Currently, virtual packages (such as mail-transport-agent) cannot be
specified by themselves. They can only be used in combination
On Monday 28 August 2006 14:59, Roger Leigh took the opportunity to say:
For the case of mail-transport-agent, this could be simply solved by
the creation of a mail-transport-agent-default package. This would
be an empty package, doing nothing but providing this dependency:
Depends: exim4
On 28/08/2006 Magnus Holmgren wrote:
Making mail-transport-agent the empty package, and having it depend only on
exim4 (the default), should work. Of course, exim4 can't conflict with it
(but it's enough that all the others do), so if the default is changed then
the old default, the new
On Monday 28 August 2006 18:09, Jonas Meurer took the opportunity to say:
On 28/08/2006 Magnus Holmgren wrote:
Making mail-transport-agent the empty package, and having it depend only
on exim4 (the default), should work. Of course, exim4 can't conflict with
it (but it's enough that all the
Roger Leigh wrote:
Hi folks,
Following some discussion with Marco d'Itri about inetd, I'd like to
put forward some more general thoughts on virtual package handling for
some comments.
Currently, virtual packages (such as mail-transport-agent) cannot be
specified by themselves. They can only
On Monday 28 August 2006 18:48, Aurelien Jarno took the opportunity to say:
Roger Leigh wrote:
Hi folks,
Following some discussion with Marco d'Itri about inetd, I'd like to
put forward some more general thoughts on virtual package handling for
some comments.
Currently, virtual
On Mon, Aug 28, 2006 at 04:01:57PM +0200, Magnus Holmgren wrote:
Making mail-transport-agent the empty package, and having it depend only on
exim4 (the default), should work. Of course, exim4 can't conflict with it
(but it's enough that all the others do),
No, that's not enough. The exim4
Magnus Holmgren [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Actually they can, but it's recommended that a real package be given as
well. From /usr/share/lintian/checks/fields.desc:
Tag: virtual-package-depends-without-real-package-depends
Type: warning
Ref: policy 7.4
Info: The package declares a depends
12 matches
Mail list logo
