On Tue, Sep 05, 2006 at 01:30:19PM +0200, Marco d'Itri wrote: > This may be a good time to remind maintainers that often a versioned > conflict may be more appropriate than a versioned dependency.
This seems natural to me, but the policy contains this discouraging language: A Conflicts entry should almost never have an "earlier than" version clause. This would prevent dpkg from upgrading or installing the package which declared such a conflict until the upgrade or removal of the conflicted-with package had been completed. I'm not exactly sure what is being said here. The second sentence seems to be *exactly* the effect I would seek when doing a versioned "earlier than" conflict. So I don't understand why the policy says one should "almost never" have one. -- Lionel -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
