On Mon, 4 Jan 2016 11:12:06 +0100 Christoph Berg <m...@debian.org> wrote:
> Re: Herbert Fortes (hpfn) 2016-01-04 <5689ac0b.4050...@ig.com.br> > > >This is a serious bug as it makes installation fail, and violates > > >sections 7.6.1 and 10.1 of the policy. An optimal solution would > > >consist in only one of the packages installing that file, and renaming > > >or removing the file in the other package. Depending on the > > >circumstances you might also consider Replace relations or file > > >diversions. If the conflicting situation cannot be resolved then, as a > > >last resort, the two packages have to declare a mutual > > >Conflict. Please take into account that Replaces, Conflicts and > > >diversions should only be used when packages provide different > > >implementations for the same functionality. > > > > As I understand, 'Conflicts' can be a solution. The packages > > are for complete different use. And they are *-dev packages. > > Policy says Conflicts should be avoided if the packages are doing > something different. It would be bad user experience if a system > running pacemaker/corosync couldn't have the webcamoid stuff installed > in parallel. > > Though given the problem is only between -dev packages, I'd guess > using Conflicts would be okayish. > > As webcamoid is the newer package, the problem should probably first > fixed on that side. Herbert, can you arrange that? > I agree that webcamoid is who should be adapted. Using 'Conflicts' is the easy way for me. I'm not sure in how to put the file in something like /usr/lib/*/webcamoid/ (it was suggested). How do I do to the file be found. regards, -- Herbert Parentes Fortes Neto (hpfn)
