On Thu, Apr 13, 2006 at 05:03:19PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote: > Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Package: x11-common > > Version: 1:7.0.10 > > Severity: serious > > The xorg 7 x11-common package has an undeclared conflict with all > > packages installing binaries in /usr/X11R6/bin: since /usr/X11R6/bin is > > only included in the system path via the /usr/bin/X11 symlink which no > > longer points there, and since many packages reference the > > /usr/X11R6/bin path internally for accessing binaries which are no > > longer physically located there, partial transitions of this directory > > are not possible and conflicts are needed to ensure a consistent system. > One question I have on this: That location is not always but almost > always due to imake, not due to any conscious decision by the package. If > the packages are rebuilt with the latest X.org 7 imake, will that imake > default to the new, correct FHS paths? I realize that doesn't mean one > can just binNMU since generally packaging files will also have to be > updated, but it would make the transition a lot easier. David tells me that the imake in unstable *should* be doing the right thing. I'm not aware that it's been tested yet. Can you stomach imake long enough to check this out for us? :) BTW, final list of packages needing to be conflicted with is at <http://ftp-master.debian.org/~vorlon/x11-common-conflicts.txt>. 87 total, including 9 that are specifically not an issue for sarge->etch upgrades due to existing conflicts with packages that their sarge versions depend on. Cheers, -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.debian.org/
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
