Re: Understanding package dependencies
On Sat, Oct 07, 2023 at 01:04:56PM +0000, Michael Kjörling wrote:
> On 7 Oct 2023 13:47 +0200, from keller.steve@gmx.de (Steve Keller):
> > # aptitude purge lsb-base
> > The following packages will be REMOVED:
> > lsb-base{p}
> > 0 packages upgraded, 0 newly installed, 1 to remove and 0 not upgraded.
> > Need to get 0 B of archives. After unpacking 12.3 kB will be freed.
> > Do you want to continue? [Y/n/?]
> >
> > Won't continuing here leave ntpsec with an unresolved package dependency?
> I'm not sure if that's it, and I'm pretty sure I've never seen a `{p}`
> (is that aptitude's way of indicating that a package will be purged
> rather than just uninstalled; that which apt-get shows as `*`?), but
> might at least a partial explanation be that lsb-base in Bookworm is
> an empty transitional package?
That's definitely part of the whole picture, yes.
Package: sysvinit-utils
[...]
Provides: lsb-base (= 11.1.0)
When you remove the physical lsb-base package, the virtual package
provided by sysvinit-utils remains, to satisfy the dependencies of
ntpsec, rsync, etc.
Reply to: