On Mon, Dec 09, 2013 at 11:42:13AM -0800, Steve Langasek wrote:
> You must use versioned Replaces, and *not* versioned Breaks, for the case of
> moving files between Essential packages. Since (as others have mentioned)
> the version of sysvinit-utils that drops pidof needs to add a Pre-Dep ond
> p
On Mon, Dec 09, 2013 at 01:56:57PM +1100, Craig Small wrote:
> As pidof is moving from sysvinit-utils to procps-base in the next
> release, I want to check I've got the way dpkg handles flags correctly.
> procps-base will contain the new pidof and will be
> Essential: yes
> Breaks: sysvinit-ut
On 2013-12-09 04:55 +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> On Mon, 2013-12-09 at 13:56 +1100, Craig Small wrote:
>> As pidof is moving from sysvinit-utils to procps-base in the next
>> release, I want to check I've got the way dpkg handles flags correctly.
>>
>> procps-base will contain the new pidof and
Hello,
2013-12-09 03:55, Ben Hutchings:
> On Mon, 2013-12-09 at 13:56 +1100, Craig Small wrote:
> > As pidof is moving from sysvinit-utils to procps-base in the next
> > release, I want to check I've got the way dpkg handles flags correctly.
> >
> > procps-base will contain the new pidof and will
On Mon, 2013-12-09 at 13:56 +1100, Craig Small wrote:
> As pidof is moving from sysvinit-utils to procps-base in the next
> release, I want to check I've got the way dpkg handles flags correctly.
>
> procps-base will contain the new pidof and will be
> Essential: yes
> Breaks: sysvinit-utils <
As pidof is moving from sysvinit-utils to procps-base in the next
release, I want to check I've got the way dpkg handles flags correctly.
procps-base will contain the new pidof and will be
Essential: yes
Breaks: sysvinit-utils << 2.88dsf-43
Now, if there is a new Essential package, is that au
6 matches
Mail list logo
