Andrius Merkys writes:
> On 09/06/2018 07:12 AM, Russ Allbery wrote:
>> As part of that transition, it looks like exactly what you said
>> ("adaptation and rebuilding of all packages depending on blacs-mpi")
>> was done for the packages in Debian.
> many thanks for the explanation. I was not
Hello,
On 09/06/2018 07:12 AM, Russ Allbery wrote:
> As part of that transition, it looks like exactly what you said
> ("adaptation and rebuilding of all packages depending on blacs-mpi") was
> done for the packages in Debian.
many thanks for the explanation. I was not aware of #886711, thanks
Andrius Merkys writes:
> thanks for pointing this out. I was quite surprised that
> Provides/Replaces does not formally require the providing/replacing
> binaries to completely cover provided/replaced binaries.
> The reason I'm asking is the removal of binaries of blacs-mpi, which is
>
Hi Paul,
On 09/02/2018 12:44 PM, Paul Wise wrote:
> The fields are defined in Debian Policy:
>
> https://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-relationships.html#virtual-packages-provides
>
On Sun, Sep 2, 2018 at 4:14 PM, Andrius Merkys wrote:
> I fail to find the formal definitions (regarding API/ABI and files) of
> Provides and Replaces fields of d/control, could someone point it out to me
> please? In particular, if package A Provides/Replaces B, does that mean that
> A MUST have
Dear Mentors,
I fail to find the formal definitions (regarding API/ABI and files) of
Provides and Replaces fields of d/control, could someone point it out to me
please? In particular, if package A Provides/Replaces B, does that mean
that A MUST have the same API/ABI and files as B?
Many thanks,
6 matches
Mail list logo
