team-xbmc team mailing list archive

Thread
Date

Bug#700945: xbmc-standalone: dummy transitional package does not depend on package(s) that replace it

To: Michael Deegan <bugs@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
From: Balint Reczey <balint@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sun, 29 Dec 2013 17:25:04 +0100
Cc: 700945@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, 700945-done@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <20130219152742.GA3699@deegan.id.au>
Original-sender: Réczey Bálint <rbalint@xxxxxxxxx>
Reply-to: Balint Reczey <balint@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, 700945@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Resent-cc: Team XBMC <team-xbmc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Resent-date: Sun, 29 Dec 2013 16:27:01 +0000
Resent-from: Balint Reczey <balint@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Resent-message-id: <handler.700945.B700945.13883343195113@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Resent-sender: Debian BTS <debbugs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Resent-to: debian-bugs-dist@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sender: Réczey Bálint <rbalint@xxxxxxxxx>
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20131103 Icedove/17.0.10

fixed 700945 2:12.2+dfsg1-1
thanks

On 02/19/2013 04:27 PM, Michael Deegan wrote:
> Package: xbmc-standalone
> Version: 2:11.0~git20120510.82388d5-1
> Severity: normal
> 
> Dear Maintainer,
> 
> Transitional packages work better when they actively facilitate the
> transition to their replacements. :)
True.

The xbmc package has moved to the simpler method of handling the transition.

From https://wiki.debian.org/Renaming_a_Package:
...
Method 1 (only useful in very easy cases)

One method is to just have the new package provide, replace and conflict
the old package.

This has disadvantages:

    If there are versioned depends on the old package, they will break.
    Most package managers (including APT, as of 2011-02-21) do not know
to replace the old with the new one and will only use the new package if
it is installed for some other reason.
...

I'm not sure if APT caught up since then. I think if it has not, it may,
thus IMO staying with the new method is future-proof.

Cheers,
Balint

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature