[324] in athena10
Re: Evolution stuff
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Aaron M. Ucko)
Tue Jul 22 15:40:00 2008
To: ghudson@mit.edu
Cc: athena10@mit.edu
From: ucko@debian.org (Aaron M. Ucko)
Date: Tue, 22 Jul 2008 15:39:13 -0400
In-Reply-To: <200807221545.m6MFjtUF017059@outgoing.mit.edu> (ghudson@MIT.EDU's message of "Tue, 22 Jul 2008 11:45:55 -0400 (EDT)")
Message-ID: <udlljztso7y.fsf@vinegar-pot.mit.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
ghudson@MIT.EDU writes:
> Also, I'm concerned about the user experience if evolution-data-server
> is upgraded and autodebathenify doesn't run in time. I'm not sure
> whether aptitude will hold back libcamel purely on the basis of a
> Recommends clause.
I wouldn't rely on it.
> new package would Provide and Replace and Conflict with
> libcamel1.2-11, so I'm not sure if it would really be morally
> different from being named libcamel1.2-11. (The same question
> applies to debathena-lprng, which Replaces and Conflicts with
> lprng.)
The main difference is that Provides: declarations never satisfy
versioned dependencies. In this case, that's a showstopper, as
dependencies on library packages are typically versioned and
evolution's dependency on libcamel is no exception. FTR, the relevant
dpkg feature request is http://bugs.debian.org/112131 .
BTW, sorry the bash suggestion didn't work out; I had forgotten about
the possibility of tarball-in-tarball setups, which are generally a
nuisance to deal with. :-/
--
Aaron M. Ucko, KB1CJC (amu at alum.mit.edu, ucko at debian.org)
http://www.mit.edu/~amu/ | http://stuff.mit.edu/cgi/finger/?amu@monk.mit.edu
