[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

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
searched libraries.

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
bug :-)

>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, ig25@dkauni2.bitnet.
The joy of engineering is to find a straight line on a double
logarithmic diagram.


--
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org . 
Trouble?  e-mail to templin@bucknell.edu .


Reply to: