Control: tag -1 - moreinfo On 2017-07-08 21:58, Paul Gevers wrote: > On 07/08/17 21:40, Andreas Beckmann wrote: >> In case the package was not part of an intermediate stable release, >> the version from the preceding stable release was kept installed.
> Can you clarify what you mean by this? That doesn't apply in your case. It's for packages like compiz that were last seen in squeeze (or something) and reappeared in stretch (with sightly different package layout), having upgrade problems if some old bits were still installed. > Emacs23 hasn't been in Debian stable since wheezy. I removed the checks > for < emacs24 from my latest upload because of that. Do you think I > really should keep on checking these old versions? And is so, how far do > I need to go back? emacs22? emacs21?.... And until when? Unlike many other packages, the old emacsXX packages seem to stay (co-)installable forever ... there is nothing on the upgrade path that makes them go away. But having them installed, triggers stuff to be run with them at installation time of other packages. I would probably add Breaks: emacs23 (and maybe more old versions previously covered by the removed checks) for one stable release and thereafter you can be sure that these old cruft versions can't do harm to your package in the future. > For what it is worth, in Depends emacspeak has emacs25 | emacs (>=47.0~) > because emacspeak is also incompatible with emacs24 (but doesn't fail on > it). Andreas
