On Sun, 18 Nov 2007 09:26:09 +0100, "Andreas Metzler" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: > following a brief discussion o debian-devel locate is going to be > split off from the findutils package. > [<http://tinyurl.com/2s32v3>] > This has already happened in experimental and will soon be done in > sid, too. A fix to make dlocate work both with the curent setup and a > separate locate package is attached. <...> > +if [ -x /usr/bin/locate.findutils ] ; then > + # locate package is installed > + LOCATE="/usr/bin/locate.findutils" > +else > + # slocate diverts locate > + LOCATE=`/usr/sbin/dpkg-divert --truename /usr/bin/locate` > +fi
If I understood the discussion on the mailing list correctly, the new slocate would use the alternatives mechanism, too, and you are now requiring a suitable version of locate to be installed, so isn't the slocate case dead code under these circumstances? Sure, it's required for the transition phase (if somebody has findutils << 4.2.31-2 and slocate), but wouldn't it be simpler to say Conflicts: slocate <= older than this transition? ... Hmm, or add a comment that this could be changed in lenny+1 to conflict with slocate <= old and remove this case from the code? Just thinking out loud here; sorry for the interruption. /* era */ -- If this were a real .signature, it would suck less. Well, maybe not. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
