Henning Glawe wrote: > To illustrate the scenario: > - Package A depends on package B, which in turn depends on A > 0) User calls 'apt-get install <long-list-of-packages1> A B > <long-list-of-packages2>': > 1) apt splits the whole list into smaller parts after sorting by dependency > where, in case this bug occurs: > <part1>="<long-list-of-packages3> A" > <part2>="B <long-list-of-packages4>" > 2) apt calls 'dpkg --unpack' for each element of <part1> and <part2> > == so far no problem == > 3) apt calls 'dpkg --configure <part1>' and 'dpkg --configure <part2>' > where the first step already fails, because B is not in > <part1>, but A depends on B > == complete failure, user has to recover manually: debconf will not break in this situation (BTW, it's not formally essential, but it needs to have the same qualities as essential packages, and does.) -- see shy jo
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature