Re: Package priorities and dependencies.
Dale Scheetz wrote:
>Two packages in the list of "important" refused to install because they
>declared (correctly) their dependence upon packages of lower priority.
> at depends on libelf0 priority: optional
This dependency isn't needed... hmm...
For some reason, the configure script created by autoconf always
looks for -lelf and, if it can find it, adds it to the list of
First, why does my autoconf - generated configure search for -lelf and
then always adds it? IMHO, this is a bug in autoconf; I never asked it
to do that.
Second, this is a bug in at; I'll uninstall the libelf binary from
the system I compile at on, so this doesn't happen again. That will
be fixed in the next release, although it's far from being a critical
>This tells me that libelf0 and libg++27 should have their priority field
>changed to "important".
In principle, you're right :-)
Thomas Koenig, Thomas.Koenig@ciw.uni-karlsruhe.de, firstname.lastname@example.org.
The joy of engineering is to find a straight line on a double
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
Trouble? e-mail to email@example.com .