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

Re: If *-module depends on *-utils, should *-source recommend it?



Scott James Remnant <scott@netsplit.com> writes:

> On Tue, 2005-01-11 at 01:35 -0500, William Ballard wrote:
>
>> On Tue, Jan 11, 2005 at 06:16:01AM +0000, Scott James Remnant wrote:
>> > dpkg doesn't remove foo-modules_1.0 at all.
>> 
> Note that I said "remove", the old files are replaced during the unpack
> phase rather than removed.
>
> It's generally assumed that if you're unpacking a package, you actually
> want it installed.
>
>
> 1) No banana or icecream:
>
> 	descent tmp# dpkg -s banana
> 	Package: banana
> 	Status: purge ok not-installed
> 	Architecture: all
>
> 	descent tmp# dpkg -s icecream
> 	Package: icecream
> 	Status: purge ok not-installed
> 	Architecture: all
>
>
> 2) Install banana 1.0:
>
> 	descent tmp# dpkg -i banana_1.0.all.deb
> 	Selecting previously deselected package banana.
> 	(Reading database ... 140490 files and directories currently installed.)
> 	Unpacking banana (from banana_1.0.all.deb) ...
> 	Setting up banana (1.0) ...
>
> 	descent tmp# cat /banana
> 	This is banana 1.0.
>
> 	descent tmp# dpkg -s banana
> 	Package: banana
> 	Status: install ok installed
> 	Maintainer: Scott James Remnant <scott@netsplit.com>
> 	Architecture: all
> 	Version: 1.0
> 	Description: yellow fruit
>
>
> 3) Upgrade to banana 2.0 (which needs icecream):
>
> 	descent tmp# dpkg -i banana_2.0.all.deb
> 	(Reading database ... 140492 files and directories currently installed.)
> 	Preparing to replace banana 1.0 (using banana_2.0.all.deb) ...
> 	Unpacking replacement banana ...
> 	dpkg: dependency problems prevent configuration of banana:
> 	 banana depends on icecream; however:
> 	  Package icecream is not installed.
> 	dpkg: error processing banana (--install):
> 	 dependency problems - leaving unconfigured
> 	Errors were encountered while processing:
> 	 banana
>
>
>    As you point out, banana 2.0 has been unpacked:
>
> 	descent tmp# cat /banana
> 	This is banana 2.0.
>
>    And is left in an "unpacked" state, rather than installed:
>
> 	descent tmp# dpkg -s banana
> 	Package: banana
> 	Status: install ok unpacked
> 	Maintainer: Scott James Remnant <scott@netsplit.com>
> 	Architecture: all
> 	Version: 2.0
> 	Config-Version: 1.0
> 	Depends: icecream
> 	Description: yellow fruit
>
>
> 4) We need icecream, so install it:
>
> 	descent tmp# dpkg -i icecream_1.0.all.deb
> 	Selecting previously deselected package icecream.
> 	(Reading database ... 140491 files and directories currently installed.)
> 	Unpacking icecream (from icecream_1.0.all.deb) ...
> 	Setting up icecream (1.0) ...
>
>
> 5) And complete configuration of banana:
>
> 	descent tmp# dpkg --configure -a
> 	Setting up banana (2.0) ...
>
> 	descent tmp# dpkg -s banana
> 	Package: banana
> 	Status: install ok installed
> 	Maintainer: Scott James Remnant <scott@netsplit.com>
> 	Architecture: all
> 	Version: 2.0
> 	Depends: icecream
> 	Description: yellow fruit
>
> Scott

To make it clearer say banana 1.0 also contains
/banana-without-icecream while banana 2.0 contains
/banana-with-icecream.

At what point would /banana-without-icecream be removed by dpkg?

MfG
        Goswin



Reply to: