> it's an either/or situation (i.e. no way of satisfying both parties Actually, it isn't -- there's an easy way of giving users a choice, and two people have suggested it already (debconf). This seems to be the most Debianish way to handle it - technologically superior, and avoids punishing one set of users at the expense of the other (even if it is a small minority, you don't care about that when you're in it :-)
- Re: Packages should not Conflict on t... Alexander N. Benner
- Re: Packages should not Conflict on t... Craig Sanders
- RE: Packages should not Conflict on t... Terry Katz
- Re: Packages should not Conflict on t... Martin Bialasinski
- RE: Packages should not Conflict on t... Rick
- RE: Packages should not Conflict on t... Terry Katz
- runlevel solution Colin Walters
- Re: Packages should not Conflict on t... Laurel Fan
- Re: Packages should not Conflict on t... Martin Bialasinski
- Re: Packages should not Conflict on t... Craig Sanders
- Re: Packages should not Conflict on t... Mark W. Eichin
- Re: Packages should not Conflict on t... Craig Sanders
- Re: Packages should not Conflict on the basis of dupli... Joey Hess
- Re: Packages should not Conflict on the basis of ... Seth R Arnold
- Re: Packages should not Conflict on the basis... Joey Hess
- Re: Packages should not Conflict on the b... John Hasler
- Re: Packages should not Conflict on the basis of ... Michael Stone
- Re: Packages should not Conflict on the basis... Martin Bialasinski
- Re: Packages should not Conflict on the b... Michael Stone
- Re: Packages should not Conflict on t... Raul Miller
- Re: Packages should not Conflict on t... Martin Bialasinski