Re: APT broken ?
My 2 cents.
A package that's unconfigured is unconfigured. It makes no sense for
apt or anything else to assume that a package foo-2.1-4 is providing
the functionality that another package, bar, that "Depends: foo (>=
2.1-4)" needs.
Making such an assumption is just asking for trouble. Knowing the
assumption that an unconfigured package is actually OK wrt respect to
the particular needs of every package that depends on it would require
in the general case, contacting the maintainer of every one of the
dependent packages and finding out exactly why the dependency was
issued, and whether or not the satisfaction of the dependency actually
requires completion of the configuration step. This is often no more
difficult than just finding out and/or fixing whatever's wrong with
the foo package that prevented it from configuring in the first place.
A package that's on hold and configured is another story. It really
is installed and it should satsfy all the dependencies it provides as
expected.
All this is assuming I understand the issue at hand...
--
Rob Browning <rlb@cs.utexas.edu>
PGP fingerprint = E8 0E 0D 04 F5 21 A0 94 53 2B 97 F5 D6 4E 39 30
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Reply to: