Re: first draft "aptitude howto"
On 04-Apr-00, 15:28 (CDT), Daniel Burrows <Daniel_Burrows@brown.edu> wrote:
> I'm not duplicating it, I'm representing it in a different way
> which can't be mapped to and from the dselect states without losing
> information: for example, you can't have a "to be installed but also
> new" state in dselect.
Ok, I completely accept the info-loss, but it would be nice if the
representable part ("to be installed") made the transfer.
> The *only* status changes that dselect won't notice are information
> about the user's intent: ie, this package should be installed,
> removed, upgraded, held downgraded, etc. I don't see this as being a
> huge problem, except for information about holds.
I agree, losing the "intent" stuff would be livable, but the
addition/removal of a hold is, in my mind at least, more than just
That said, your comment in the other response ("Quit yer bitchin and
write some code" (Ok, I paraphrased)) is completely fair, and I'll at
least stop whining.
Steve Greenland <email@example.com>
(Please do not CC me on mail sent to this list; I subscribe to and read
every list I post to.)