Hi Laurent, Laurent Fousse wrote: > * Jonathan Nieder [Thu, Oct 11, 2012 at 03:35:32PM -0700]:
>> | However, normally the presence of an "earlier than" version clause >> | is a sign that Breaks should have been used instead. An "earlier >> | than" version clause in Conflicts prevents dpkg from upgrading or >> | installing the package which declares such a conflict until the >> | upgrade or removal of the conflicted-with package has been >> | completed, which is a strong restriction. >> >> so the patch below switches to a Breaks+Replaces. Seems to work ok. [...] > Thanks for your patch. gmp-ecm should use a "Breaks" clause with the > ecm package. > > I'm not sure about "Replaces". It's not like the ecm binary provided > by the gmp-ecm package provides any similar functionality to the one > provided by the ecm package. What problem does the addition of the > Replace line solve? What's the downside of not having it? The Replaces allows dpkg to install gmp-ecm on top of ecm despite the file conflict. Without the Replaces, dpkg would error out to prevent clobbering the conflicting file. Thanks, Jonathan -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
