[Pkg-openssl-devel] Bug#863367: Bug#863367: libecryptfs-dev: unable to install because of unmet dependency

[David Kalnischkies]

On Sat, May 27, 2017 at 04:31:46PM +0200, Kurt Roeckx wrote:
> In general, I disagree that we should declare a conflict at both
> sides of the conflict and that the package manager should be able
> to deal with a conflict on just one side. It's not a conflict that
> involves version numbers.

The idea behind not automatically having the conflict effect both sides
is that a package which declares a conflict has a competitive advantage
over the conflictee as it reduces the score of the conflictee which
makes it easier for the conflictor to win against it in fights.
If apt would apply the conflict automatically on both sides the
advantage disappears. That hinders the successful resolution of the
usual situation in case a conflict isn't declared on both sides: The
package which hasn't the conflict is the "old" package (not updated for
the release e.g. because it was removed) which should loose against the
"new" package which has the conflict declared.


Beside that little heuristic trickery I believe it to be cleaner and
more discoverable for a user that such a conflict exists and is intended
if it is declared on both sides.

And lastly, I guess 'domain knowledge' is involved as we wouldn't be
talking if libssl-dev would be a new mail-transport-agent. It would be
perfectly clear that it must conflict with the others even if there is
no technical reason for it given that the other mail-transport-agents
already conflict with it.


Best regards

David Kalnischkies
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 833 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-openssl-devel/attachments/20170528/bf37b01f/attachment.sig>