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

Re: dependancy issues

On Mon, Jan 03, 2005 at 01:01:03AM +0100, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> Le dimanche 02 janvier 2005 à 12:49 -0600, Steve Greenland a écrit :
> > On 01-Jan-05, 21:14 (CST), Marc Wilson <msw@cox.net> wrote: 
> > > On Sat, Jan 01, 2005 at 05:07:42PM -0800, Carl B. Constantine wrote:
> > > > I'm trying to trim my system a little bit. I wanted to purge Evolution
> > > > from my system since I use Mutt for email. But doing that wants to
> > > > remove Gnome.
> > > 
> > > So it wants to remove the Gnome meta-package.  So what?
> > 
> > So doing so causes all the packages that the gnome meta-package depended
> > on to be de-installed, if one is using package tool that tracks packages
> > that were installed to fulfill a dependency; aptitude, for example. This
> > can be disconcerting.
> > 
> > It means you need to go in and (re-)select all the smaller
> > meta-packages, etc. that you actually want to keep.

Yep. That is a lot of "m".  If new dependency is added with updated
version of gnome package, we will never know :-(

> Why in the world would you then want to install a metapackage if its
> selection doesn't suit you?

These meta packages are like recommendation package for me.

If everyone uses "aptitude" with option for installing recommended
packages turned on, these packages should be listed under "Recommends:"
instead of "Depends:".

I guess these are listed under "Depends" because the auto install should
work under apt-get command etc..

The use of commands from "equivs" package seems to be only available
work around.

Maybe some easy access to equivs functionality from aptitude is desired
feature for post sarge aptitude.

Reply to: