Re: Understanding package dependencies
On 7 Oct 2023 13:47 +0200, from keller.steve@gmx.de (Steve Keller):
> But how can this then be explained?
>
> # aptitude why lsb-base
> i ntpsec Depends lsb-base
> # aptitude show ntpsec | grep ^Depends
> Depends: adduser, lsb-base, netbase, python3, python3-ntp (= 1.2.2+dfsg1-1+deb12u1), tzdata, libbsd0 (>= 0.0), libc6 (>= 2.34), libcap2 (>= 1:2.10), libssl3 (>= 3.0.0)
> # aptitude purge lsb-base
> The following packages will be REMOVED:
> lsb-base{p}
> 0 packages upgraded, 0 newly installed, 1 to remove and 0 not upgraded.
> Need to get 0 B of archives. After unpacking 12.3 kB will be freed.
> Do you want to continue? [Y/n/?]
>
> Won't continuing here leave ntpsec with an unresolved package dependency?
I'm not sure if that's it, and I'm pretty sure I've never seen a `{p}`
(is that aptitude's way of indicating that a package will be purged
rather than just uninstalled; that which apt-get shows as `*`?), but
might at least a partial explanation be that lsb-base in Bookworm is
an empty transitional package?
On a freshly installed and up-to-date Bookworm VM, installing ntpsec
doesn't pull in lsb-base (the only additional package pulled in by
`apt-get install ntpsec` is python3-ntp), nor is lsb-base installed
after installation.
--
Michael Kjörling 🔗 https://michael.kjorling.se
“Remember when, on the Internet, nobody cared that you were a dog?”
Reply to: