Re: Bug#21780 acknowledged by developer (apt-get install won't)
On Sat, 23 May 1998, Rev. Joseph Carter wrote:
> > I'm closing bug #21780 with this because I think the concerns are
> > addressed by the remove notation, and that it's much more likely that APT
> > does what the user wants for -f now.
>
> Yes actually it is taken care of by apt-get -f install package1 ... pachageN
> which I was not aware would work. Um, are the -'d packages given a remove
> or a purge? I imagine they'd be removed in proper order as well as apt can
> figure out?
A remove - come to think of it apt never purges, even if it's set to purge
in dselect, I'll try to fix that soonly too :|
> This would be useful for what? apt-get install exim sendmail- ? =>
> Actually I use qmail, but I'm thinking of trying exim sometime if I can get
Nope,
apt-get install exim
libdb1-dev
Updating package status cache...done
Checking system integrity...ok
The following extra packages will be installed:
debianutils libpcre1 libc5 libc6 cron
The following packages will be REMOVED:
sendmail ncurses3.0-dev libg++27-dev libc5-dev libdb1-dev libgdbm1-dev
The following NEW packages will be installed:
libpcre1 libc6 exim
3 packages upgraded, 3 newly installed, 6 to remove and 155 not upgraded.
>From a bo system that has sendmail installed. install, dist-upgrade and -f
are really fairly clever about what to change to accomidate your requests.
The remove notation is proably only usefull if you are testing apt, but
you never know.
Jason
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to deity-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Reply to: