Re: apt-get problems.
On Saturday 26 March 2005 18:07, Maurits van Rees wrote:
>On Sat, Mar 26, 2005 at 10:28:24AM -0500, Gene Heskett wrote:
>> There really needs to be a switch one could set to tell apt-get to
>> ignore that which has nothing to do with the program being
>> evaluated for installation. In that manner, it might be possible
>> to gradually bring a system *it* thinks is hosed, back into
>> compliance one program at a time as the newer versions do become
>> available. Its all or nothing attitude is unbecoming at best and
>> renders it a far less usefull tool than it should be.
>
>So to make an analogy you want to say to apt: "Yes, I know my car
> has a flat tire, but can you please ignore that for a moment and
> just install a steering wheel?" Sounds like a valid wish. [You may
> want to submit a wishlist bug for apt-get then.]
>
>I wonder if the apt-get option '--fix-broken' is of use here. I have
>never used it, but it might be (part of) the solution.
I've looked at the list that outputs as to what it will remove, and
its approaching 25% of the system. Obviously I didn't type a y.
>
>> Now, if we had a program that would allow the editing of the
>> installed packages database, doing it in an error correcting
>> mostly automatic manner (the tools to obtain the linkage
>> dependencies are available I believe) so that apt-get does know
>> the pertinant details of what you've installed from the tarball,
>> one could with a bit of diligence, bring the system back into
>> compliance with the apt-get defined view of the world.
>>
>> Lacking that tool, our systems work very well indeed but we are
>> still hosed and prevented from making use what is otherwise a
>> truely great tool. So we go get the new tarball and install it
>> instead, thereby compounding the issue at an ever higher rate.
>
>Work with the system, not against the system. When you install a
>tarball you probably know what you are doing. So you probably know
>what libraries or other programs your tarball depends upon. Then
> make a Debian package out of it! It need not be that hard, though I
> have never done it myself. Even a dummy package may be enough:
> create a package that has no content, but does depend on the
> libraries that your tarball depends upon. Or if you have some
> packages that you need to keep installed but that depend on a
> removed package, you could make a dummy package that Provides that
> removed package. Apt will be happy because all dependencies are
> solved and you will be happy because your packages are not on the
> extermination list anymore.
rpms don't seem to make that all that easy. Apt-get doesn't seem to
recognize that the final install of program x was made by the latest
version of checkinstall, primarily because one has to prepare the
so-called spec file's dependency list in way more detail than I have
at my fingertips. And of course checkinstall doesn't call it that
either, further confusing the issue.
>Does anyone know a tool that makes this easy?
--
Cheers, Gene
"There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order."
-Ed Howdershelt (Author)
99.34% setiathome rank, not too shabby for a WV hillbilly
Yahoo.com and AOL/TW attorneys please note, additions to the above
message by Gene Heskett are:
Copyright 2005 by Maurice Eugene Heskett, all rights reserved.
Reply to: