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

Re: sysvinit & kbd



In article <[🔎] Pine.LNX.3.96.980316114117.259H-100000@Wakko.ualberta.ca>,
Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@gpu.srv.ualberta.ca> wrote:
>
>On 16 Mar 1998, Miquel van Smoorenburg wrote:
>> >While we are complaining about these two, they mutually conflict and that
>> >is evil!
>> 
>> .. but legal. Just install them in one go.
>
>Excuse me? No. You must remove kbd and then install sysvinit and then kbd
>again. dpkg will not allow to unpack a package that causes a conflicts to
>be false (except in some obscure cases).

So? You missed my point. Just install them in one go. Look:

  # dpkg -l | egrep 'sysvinit|kbd'
  ii  kbd             0.95-2         Linux console font and keytable utilities.
  ii  sysvinit        2.72-3         System-V like init.
  
  # dpkg -i sysvinit_2.74-2.deb kbd_0.95-4.deb 
  (Reading database ... 15805 files and directories currently installed.)
  Preparing to replace sysvinit 2.72-3 (using sysvinit_2.74-2.deb) ...
  
    The package manager might ask you if you want to install new versions
    of the /etc/init.d/whatever files. This is generally a good idea
    (so reply with ``y'') unless you really changed any of these files.
  
  Unpacking replacement sysvinit ...
  Preparing to replace kbd 0.95-2 (using kbd_0.95-4.deb) ...
  Unpacking replacement kbd ...
  Setting up sysvinit (2.74-2) ...
  
  Setting up kbd (0.95-4) ...
  Removing any obsolete scripts: .

Et voila. This example is not 100% honest however; there is a bug in
the combination of sysvinit_2.74-1 and kbd_0.95-4 which will cause
you to end up without a /etc/init.d/keymaps file, that's why I already
used sysvinit_2.74-2 (has been uploaded to master earlier today).

>Just to stress this, circular conflicts/conflicts looping is very bad,

If you want to install packages one-by-one by hand. But then you have
to resolve the dependencies by hand anyway (eg shared libs) so you
should be able to figure this one out as well.

Dselect should do it right by itself.

>predepends/conflicts looping is very bad and predepends/predepends is
>frobidden. Also when dealing with essentail packages and their recursive
>dependancies you must advoid loops involved depends as well.

But in this case I maintain that there is no problem.

Mike.
-- 
 Miquel van Smoorenburg |  
    miquels@cistron.nl  |  Luck is when preparation meets opportunity


--
E-mail the word "unsubscribe" to debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST. Trouble? E-mail to listmaster@lists.debian.org


Reply to: