On Feb 12, 2004 at 23:15, Chris Cheney praised the llamas by saying: > On Thu, Feb 12, 2004 at 05:53:52PM +0100, David Pashley wrote: > > Author: jd-guest > > Date: 2004-02-12 17:53:52 +0100 (Thu, 12 Feb 2004) > > New Revision: 33 > > > > Added: > > people/jd/scripts/check-replaces > > Removed: > > people/jd/scripts/check-conflicts.pl > > Log: > > It has come to my attention that I want to use Replaces, not Conflicts. > > script renamed and altered to read Replaces. The concept that a package > > conflicts with another package if they contain the same file is kept. > > I haven't looked at the new script in detail but I wanted to make sure > you know the following information. If you need to take over a file > from a package that still exists, but no longer ships that file, just > use replaces. If you have a file that needs your version and the other > package still exists and contains that file you need a conflicts. If > you have a file that needs to take over a file from a package that no > longer exists then it should be a Conflicts and Replaces, this insures > that the old package does not stay installed on the system. At least as > I understand it. ;)
I think I need to do a bit more work in parsing various Packages.gz files and getting the versions out. I've sure we can work out writing the conflicts and replaces for us. > > Also, as domi said when you use svn you should move the file not > add/remove so that changes can be tracked. :) > I did an svn move check-conflicts.pl check-replaces. that is what it did. Not sure if it kept the history. > Chris -- David Pashley [EMAIL PROTECTED] Nihil curo de ista tua stulta superstitione.
pgp5kL8YPcxi5.pgp
Description: PGP signature
