On Wednesday July 13 2005 10:21 pm, Marc Wilson wrote: > On Tue, Jul 12, 2005 at 10:42:49PM -0700, Paul Scott wrote: > > Yes, i386. aptitude here doesn't think so. I'm trying to work > > around it. > > Yes, but we all know aptitude is crap, with ideas about dependency > resolution different from the known universe, so if you're going to > use it, don't mix it with any other package management. > > It *will* break your box. There are ways to make aptitude do what you expect. It's not that hard. Why the default is to include everything under the sun is beyond me. I used to be an aptitude-hater, too, but it does tell you exactly what it's going to do and is usually reasonably sane about suggesting the right way out without breaking stuff. But as with any package management, you have to take what you get from it, particularly if you haven't set the options to what you expect, with a grain of salt. -- Paul Johnson Email and Instant Messenger (Jabber): baloo@ursine.ca http://ursine.ca/~baloo/
Attachment:
pgpnhTql1xhPO.pgp
Description: PGP signature