On Tue, Jul 04, 2017 at 10:29:35PM +0300, Niko Tyni wrote: > (dropped some cc's) > > On Tue, Jul 04, 2017 at 09:09:37PM +0200, Ralf Treinen wrote: > > > thanks for having figured that out. I tend to believe that dose is right > > in this case. Since it is not possible to install at the same > > time two different versions of the same real package, the same should > > IMHO hold when one is real and the other virtual. Why should this be > > possible? > > Well, dpkg and apt allow it for starters. > > The idea with the perl packages is that the src:perl binary packages > offer an older "stable" version of some modules while a newer version is > packaged separately and gets installed earlier on the Perl search path > (so it overrides the src:perl version when installed.) > > This has been the case for ages with the src:perl packages Providing > an unversioned virtual package. The change here is that the virtual > package is now versioned, which would simplify lots of dependencies > that currently read like (for instance)
So, that means that something like Depends: p (=1), p (=2) suddenly becomes satisfiable (when there is one real package p and one virtual package)? Would you also allow to have the packages p and q installed at the same time, in the following situation: Package: p Version: 1 Provides: v (=1) Package: q Version: 1 Provides: v (=2) If yes this seems to me a quite drastic change of the meaning of package relations. Has this been discussed somewhere? -Ralf.
