Re: testing release of Perl packages
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Jason Gunthorpe, in an immanent manifestation of deity, wrote:
>The short synopsis is that 'perl' is too important to remove, so it will
>not do so without an *explicit* request. Installing perl-5.005 is not such
>a request because it does not directly conflict with perl. Furthermore, at
>least in my case installing this new perl causes the massive purgation of
>many other perl-like packages, which makes it even more undesirable to
>install..
Yes, it does cause large numbers of other packages to be removed. We're
hoping to get those packages rebuilt soon.
>This is a bit interesting, I don't think it should fail like this, I'll
>look into it a bit more.
Just so you know the full situation:
1) perl-5.005 depends on perl-5.005-base
2) perl-5.005-base (and all perl-5.\d+-base) provide perl5-base
3) perl-base depends on perl5-base
These last are a really clever trick on Raphael's part. It means that
we can have multiple perl-5.\d+-base packages and only have one
essential package...
Could this situation be something that apt-get isn't dealing with well?
Darren
- --
<torin@daft.com> <http://www.daft.com/~torin> <torin@debian.org> <torin@io.com>
Darren Stalder/2608 Second Ave, @282/Seattle, WA 98121-1212/USA/+1-800-921-4996
@ Sysadmin, webweaver, postmaster for hire. C/Perl/CGI/Pilot programmer/tutor @
@ Make a little hot-tub in your soul. @
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.3a
Charset: noconv
Comment: Processed by Mailcrypt 3.5.1, an Emacs/PGP interface
iQCVAwUBN3XmZY4wrq++1Ls5AQENNQP/drWXv6e9gRtkgvGk2mPdpLjntmvowd3S
cSaBkwEeycKpBt3+x/AwjY1Kojj5yEKc1yzwmQXvcTASRCoYXCsPSFRlQMX1Z2JI
EFtNkNrLqMioWXSQpGf5Ex9I4Wf+x2mClvRsg1s3z3WZKwiLxWwA/5Z3kLv+LKm0
fkKpmxjaQzM=
=LQvY
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Reply to: