Re: Should a config/chroot_local-packages-exclude be useful ?
On 07/11/2010 12:26 PM, Philippe Lelédy wrote:
> So a local exclude mechanism would be welcomed.
i personally don't think so.
first of all, if packages lists are not working (because
testing/unstable changes), then they need to be fixed. an exclude
mechanism doesn't save anything there, imho.
second, if the packages lists for testing are not working because a
certain package is not available anymore, because it dropped out of
testing, then there's nothing we actually can do about it.
the real fix for this is that apt should not fail on unavailable
packages. until this is the case, i see two workarounds:
* use aptitude instead of apt (by 'fixing' that one problem,
you probably get more other problems, so this is not actually
desirable).
* we should validate the packages lists before installing them,
so that lh is warning about it and filtering unavailable packages
out and continueing (default), or, if the user configured it so
to fail. sort of like --fail-missing and --list-missing in
dh_install for those who know debhelper.
> For instance it can be
> used to exclude apparmor which doesn't work (at least in Ubuntu) on
> live system but is included, which needs a hack to disable it at each
> boot.
if you use ubuntu, then you're using casper. and casper disables apparmor.
but this is a different problem alltogether anyway: if you want to get
rid of certain packages which are pulled in by dependencies, fix the
package that depends on it. if it gets pulled in by recommends, don't
let lh install recommends automatically. as a last resort, you can also
use a local hook to remove certain packages 'manually'.
Regards,
Daniel
--
Address: Daniel Baumann, Burgunderstrasse 3, CH-4562 Biberist
Email: daniel.baumann@panthera-systems.net
Internet: http://people.panthera-systems.net/~daniel-baumann/
Reply to: