Re: APT broken ?
Dale Scheetz <dwarf@polaris.net> wrote:
> 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.
Er.. if the dependency has an explicit version relationship, how does
not having the right version satisfy the dependency? If it doesn't,
what's the problem?
I think what you're looking for is the mechanism to declare local
work as a package.
--
Raul
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Reply to: