On 6/6/05, Roberto C. Sanchez <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Mon, Jun 06, 2005 at 08:41:38PM -0400, Patrick Wiseman wrote: > > Hello: > > > > I've had nano - a free replacement for pico, the editor which comes > > with pine - installed with pine without any trouble. But I just tried > > to upgrade to pine 4.63, using the .deb file from washington.edu, and > > it bailed out because nano takes over /usr/bin/pico (which I hadn't > > realised). So, I purged nano, and installed pine. Now, when I try to > > reinstall nano, _it_ bails because /usr/bin/pico belongs to the pine > > package. Is there any way I can force aptitude to install nano over > > pine's pico? > > > > That's what you get for using packages from untrusted sources :-) > Email the UW developers and tell them to read up on diversions. > Alternatively, you can do it yourself. I don't know much about how > diversions work, but essentially you have one package inform the dpkg > database that it is taking over a file that is normally owned by another > package. If that other package is then upgraded, the files that would > collide are given an alternate name. dpkg tracks everything so that if > you remove the package that installed the diversion, the other package's > files are moved to where they belong.
Since UW can't be trusted :), I would have thought that the maintainers of the nano package would have taken care of that, knwoing that nano replaces pico. In fact, I believe they must once have done so, because this wasn't a problem before. Is there something I can do in apt.conf to give nano priority? Patrick
