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

Re: [debian-live] adding geda package kills kate package

Keith Parker wrote:
> If that line is uncommented, geda gets installed (gschem works), but
> kate goes away

you need to give information about what apt is saying when it is doing
that. also note, that this has not anything to do with debian-live, but
with how package have depends. therefore, you'll be able to see/fix the
exact same sitation on a normal installation as well.

> I tried using tee to capture the output to look for helpful messages
> but the file ended up over 3 MBytes long.

please bzip2 it and upload it somewhere for inspection.

> I suspect due to the interactive progress displays.

(which is soon to be fixed in a newer squashfs upload in sid)

> How do I disable the progress displays to keep the tee file size manageable?

currently not supported directly, but you could add a '--no-progress'
parameter to the squashfs call in lh_binary_rootfs.

> How do I recognize that there is a problem with a package/package list?

by parsing the logfile manually.

> Also, how do I know when I should be using -p vs. --packages?

-p are packages lists, --packages are individual packages.

> It is my assumption that the ORDER of specifying packages should be IRRELEVANT.
> Am I wrong about this?

as far as i know, but i may be very well wrong and you should check with
the apt developers about it (or aptitude in case you use aptitude), that
the order (unfortunately) doesn't matter.

Address:        Daniel Baumann, Burgunderstrasse 3, CH-4562 Biberist
Email:          daniel.baumann@panthera-systems.net
Internet:       http://people.panthera-systems.net/~daniel-baumann/

Reply to: