Re: APT broken ?
On 5 Apr 1998, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> Hi,
>
> When I put a package on hold, it has the dependencies
> satisfied (presumably). I do not wan the package to be
> upgraded until I say so. I also do not want the package to break, or
> other packages depending on it to break. If that means packages are
> held back, so be it.
I think that you and I are looking in the opposited directions with
respect to depends. You wish, rightfully, that a package on hold should
have the packages it depends on held as well. (unless the newer version
will still statisfy the depends of course) You don't want the held package
broken by its dependencies being violated.
I'm looking at the other side. I want a package on hold to continue to
satisfy the dependencies other packages have on it.
I believe that both of these desires are reasonable and correct and that
the current dpkg behaves correctly with reguard to this (at least in
design. I understand that there are bugs in dpkg.) or has, at least
behaved properly in the past with respect to these issues.
>
> I no case should the packaging system pretend that the
> dependencies are satisfied when they are not, because they may cause
> my package to break. I object strongly to the packaging system
> deluding itself and rendering my package unuseable.
I would not ask the packaging system to behave in that fashion either.
I was just looking for a way to let the package manager know that a
package dependency was met is some non-standard way.
Luck,
Dwarf
--
_-_-_-_-_- Author of "The Debian Linux User's Guide" _-_-_-_-_-_-
aka Dale Scheetz Phone: 1 (850) 656-9769
Flexible Software 11000 McCrackin Road
e-mail: dwarf@polaris.net Tallahassee, FL 32308
_-_-_-_-_-_- If you don't see what you want, just ask _-_-_-_-_-_-_-
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Reply to: