# correcting myself found 338638 3.0-20 thanks Frank Küster <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I haven't had time to think about this and do any coding. But I believe > it can only be solved by a upload *to*sarge*, because during etch > upgrade there won't be a fallback maintainer script from a new version. Okay, I played around with that a bit. Actually I see no reason why tetex-base needs to declare a conflict with older tetex-bin. It doesn't even need a Replaces. If we remove the Conflicts:, it is still guaranteed that it is impossible to install and configure a newer tetex-base with an old tetex-bin, and this is because of both tetex packages' dependency on tex-common. And because tex-common in turn conflicts with sarge's tetex packages, and I think it has a reason for that. The nice consequence is that we can be sure that the upgrade from sarge will proceed without removing tetex-base at an intermediate state, and therefore we can use a failed-upgrade stanza in the new package's preinst script. > The upload I did on this was rejected by the stable release manager. I > always wanted to raise this issue again, now that there are new persons > on this position. However, I think there was also a technical problem > with the previous upload, therefore I didn't have time to actually do it. Well, the technical problem was that I only fixed the preinst script, but did not add a failed-update stanza, so it wouldn't have worked, anyway. Regards, Frank -- Frank Küster Single Molecule Spectroscopy, Protein Folding @ Inst. f. Biochemie, Univ. Zürich Debian Developer (teTeX/TeXLive)
