On Tue, 2008-01-29 at 18:12 +0000, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> Nils Philippsen <nphilipp <at> redhat.com> writes:
> > [...]
> > Obsoletes: evince < $version
> > Conflicts: evince < $version
> > [...]
> > %package dvi
> > Obsoletes: evince < $version
> > Conflicts: evince < $version
> > [...]
> > %package djvu
> > Obsoletes: evince < $version
> > Conflicts: evince < $version
> > [...]
> >
> > This way, an existing old version of evince will get replaced by the
> > triplet evince, evince-dvi and evince-djvu but new installations won't
> > be affected --> no need for mentioning in the release ntoes.
>
> This doesn't really work: in practice, depsolvers will just pick an arbitrary
> one out of the 3 packages in such a situation, not all 3.
Is this intentional (i.e. does it serve a purpose)? Otherwise the
depsolvers should be fixed as this makes splitting up packages rather
painful.
Nils
--
Nils Philippsen / Red Hat / nphilipp@xxxxxxxxxx
"Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary
Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." -- B. Franklin, 1759
PGP fingerprint: C4A8 9474 5C4C ADE3 2B8F 656D 47D8 9B65 6951 3011
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
