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

Re: how to remove exim4 without removing mysql-server?



On Sun, Nov 14, 2004 at 11:37:58PM +0000, Brian Nelson wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 14, 2004 at 10:33:32PM -0800, Marc Wilson wrote:
> > It ignores the status file in favor of its own re-implementation of it.
> 
> That's not really a problem, other than #137771, which I assume will be
> fixed some day.

Fixed "some day"?  This is absurd.  This is a fundamental design problem.
Why in the *world* would you design the application such that it behaved
differently on such a basic level depending on how you invoked it or not?

Bug #137771 is almost *three years old*.  Every day you see on d-u people
being told to use dselect or dpkg to put packages on hold, and you see
people being told to use aptitude over apt-get.  And you don't see the
problem?

Oh, and there's also #146207, #161810, #174091, #177374, #199887, #220794,
and others.  Gee, I guess people are noticing that it doesn't work the way
the rest of the tools do, huh?  But all the maintainer does is blow it off.

Aptitude will eventually propagate a hold placed in the standard database
to its re-implemented database.  But the reverse is NEVER true.

> > Its behavior regarding dependency resolution is different depending on
> > whether you're using it from the command line or the ncurses interface.
> 
> Bug number?  I've never seen this myself, and don't really care anyway
> since I do any dependency resolution in the ncurses interface.

I can't find the bug off the top of my head... I think the maintainer
closed it finally... fixing it or not I do not know.  I do remember the
Barbie-esque comment that was in the thread though... "but dependency
resolution is HARD!".  It certainly is hard, but why should it be easier or
harder depending on the user interface?

> > It's claimed that aptitude is a drop-in replacement for apt-get, except
> 
> Claimed by whom?

I know you read d-u... it's all over the place.  Further, the fact that it
(a) has the command-line interface at all, and (b) that it implements the
same command set as apt-get is telling.

> > that aptitude by default installs Recommends/Suggests, while apt-get only
> > tells you about them.
> 
> By default it installs recommends but not suggests, which is pretty sane
> to me.

Whether it's sane or not, it's not the same behavior as apt-get, and
therefore it's not a drop-in replacement for it.

> I guess all of your problems with aptitude have to do with the
> command-line interface.  It seems rather foolish to complain about that
> though, since if your using it you're missing out on pretty much all
> of the power and usefulness of aptitude.

And no, most of what it can do, you can do from the command line or the
ncurses interface.

-- 
 Marc Wilson |     BOFH excuse #445: Browser's cookie is corrupted --
 msw@cox.net |     someone's been nibbling on it.



Reply to: