AW: ignoring dependencies
> Thomas Adam wrote:
> --- Filip Moritz <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> > Now, is there any means to apt-get install A, ignoring it's alleged
> > dependencies to B and C, not affecting it's remaining deps?
> Doing so is a really stupid idea, since the dependencies are
> there to ensure that the intended package you install will
Assuming those dependencies are well-tailored, you're right. But now A's
core functionality doesn't need B and C, only some additional features, I
don't care about, do. You might answer, the right thing to do is to file a
wishlist bug-report to split A, thats propably what I'll do anyways. But
until this effects official sarge packages, which I'm going to use by
policy, I need some workaround.
Telling the apt/dpkg system to ignore exactly A's desire for B and C would
be perfect. So again - is there any possibility do do so? I'd appreciate any
hint to this, as I'm searching for quite a while now.
> If it is the case that you have versions of packages B
> and C that are already installed, you could use 'equivs', but
> I don't think it will help you here.
I could even do so, without having B or C installed locally, but this would
effect in preventing B and C from being installed, in any other case too.
Obviously I would want to have, say C, installed as soon as any future
installation of F really needs it.
I may be even too keen in having the "least possible" fingerprint of
installed packages. However, I regard every single piece of software as
being a security risk to consider. And one runs out of one's own condidering
capacity quite fast, when just let any package deliberately let satisfy any