Re: APT broken ?
On Sun, 5 Apr 1998, Dale Scheetz wrote:
> 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.
Please, I would like to see an example or document or something that
supports your claim that dpkg considers a held [but not installed] package
as being able to satisfy dependancies.
I have never seen any such indication that this is true.
Jason
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Reply to: