Colin Watson wrote:
On Mon, Aug 23, 2004 at 11:14:21AM +0200, Harald Dunkel wrote:Colin Watson wrote:On Thu, Aug 19, 2004 at 02:45:14PM +0200, Harald Dunkel wrote:Whats behind the story about libc-udeb vs libc6? Several udebs depend upon libc6, even though this package is not included in d-i, e.g. busybox-cvs-udeb, dash-udeb, etc. Other tools depend on libc-udeb as expected (e.g. nano-udeb).libc6-udeb provides libc6, so it doesn't matter. The dependencies on libc6 are mostly generated automatically using the shlibdeps mechanism.Yes, libc6-udeb provides "libc6", but dash-udeb depends on "libc6 (>= 2.3.2.ds1-4)", which is not(!!!) provided by libc6-udeb.apt-get does not allow versioned dependencies to be satisfied by provides. However, anna (which is used in place of apt for udeb retrieval by debian-installer) does allow this. Testing with apt-get will not give you useful answers.
Sorry, I am still trying to become familiar with d-i's build procedure. AFAIK anna is not used for building d-i, but at d-i's runtime. Building d-i requires apt-get to download and install udebs, e.g. in the top level get-packages script. The only reason why you haven't got an error message at d-i's build time about a missing libc6 is because usually libc6 is already installed in your system. Anyway, I am not interested in making the error message disappear somehow. I was talking about getting rid of the inconsistency in d-i's build environment. Surely it is not OK that the Packages file in main/debian-installer contains dependencies to external *.deb files. Especially note that there is no request from my side to fix this for Sarge. Regards Harri