Re: Installing package *NOT* in repository
On Tue, Aug 14, 2018 at 01:47:25PM -0400, Cindy-Sue Causey wrote:
> On 8/13/18, Brian <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> > On Mon 13 Aug 2018 at 17:49:08 +0200, email@example.com wrote:
> >> On Mon, Aug 13, 2018 at 08:35:50AM -0700, Patrick Bartek wrote:
> >> > On Mon, 13 Aug 2018 06:47:02 -0500
> >> > Richard Owlett <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> >> As I said already, dpkg does install dependencies. Actually, I don't
> >> know any (Debian) tool which wouldn't, by default.
> > I don't think it does, y'know. That's why apt-get was created.
> I always need someone else to say the right thing to trigger thoughts.
> That's a good one there. Dpkg DOES complain about, i.e. dpkg DOES name
> the right dependencies that are missing. It just doesn't go that extra
> mile to help bring them on home.
Maybe you'd find this command relevant when installing packages
apt-get --print-uris --yes install $PACKAGE_NAME | grep ^\' | cut -d\' -f2
creates a list of needed downloads to install $PACKAGE_NAME. I don't
know who gets the credit for that one but it seems pretty nifty.
> To date, I've been lucky when going that route on occasionally regular
> occasion. The list of dependencies has been short... as has the list
> of secondary (?) dependencies that the immediately relevant
> dependencies... depend on to do THEIR own part of the whole. Each one
> needed has to be singularly tracked down and then installed.
> Very manual process. If you're into really "seeing" how things
> interact, that's one route that'll help catch a quick peek...
> including learning how to track down more packages *that won't kill
> your system* if those dependencies aren't immediately available
> through one's favored package repository. I invariably end up
> distracted by something shiny incidentally discovered when I
> absolutely have to go that route..
> Cindy :)