Re: be careful with Replaces, please
On Tue, 2 Dec 1997, Yann Dirson wrote:
> Yes: e2fsprogs used to contain shared libs, on which dump and quota
> depend. Thus, e2fsprogs was assumed to be a package with libc5 libs,
> and I could not keep the name, without breaking dump and quota on a
> hamm upgrade.
>
> I thought that, e2fsprogsg being essential, would be flaged for
> installation as soon as it appears in the available packages. Is this
> not the case ?
For me, the problem was that e2fsprogs, e2fsprogsg, and e2fslibsg
are all "required base", but since 2 of them conflict, I ended up
with only e2fslibsg. This happened on two quite different systems;
one that was a fresh install last week, and one that I've been upgrading
for at least a year. After installing e2fsprogsg, I'm left with the
following "Available Required packages"; the very existence of this
section makes me nervous.
------- Available Required packages in section base -------
__ Req base comerr2 <none> 1.10-7 The Common Error Descript
__ Req base e2fsprogs <none> 1.10-7 The EXT2 file system util
__ Req base mawk <none> 1.3.3-1.1 a pattern scanning and te
__ Req base sysklogd <none> 1.3-17.1 Kernel and system logging
__ Req base timezones <none> 2.0.5c-0.1 Time zone data files and
__ Req base update <none> 1.3-2 daemon to periodically fl
e2fsprogsg and e2fsprogs were both in there at one point. I suppose that
being "required base" doesn't cause a package to be installed, and none of
my installed packages required e2fsprogsg or anything that's provided by
e2fsprogsg.
--
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: