On Sun, Mar 20, 2016 at 05:38:05PM -0700, Josh Triplett wrote: > James McCoy wrote: > > > > Leaving aside any other reasons: many packages have a versioned > > > > dependency on iceweasel, and we don't have versioned provides. > > > [...] > > > > > > Yes we do, since dpkg 1.18. > > > Yet others parts of our infrastructure still need updates to handle then > > (e.g., britney). > > Ah. So I assume that packages using versioned Provides probably > shouldn't get uploaded to the archive until that happens?
Not in this case -- you need britney only for testing migration, dose for archive satisfiability checks. These are fine as long as "iceweasel" is a real package, and at present it is. As for actually installing the packages, both apt and dpkg do support versioned provides. Thus, if "firefox" gains such a Provides: (it currently lacks it), such dependencies will be satisfied. -- A tit a day keeps the vet away.
