Re: apt-get package order on commandline matters
On Tue, 12 Sep 2000, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> On Wed, 13 Sep 2000, J.A. Bezemer wrote:
>
> > Just encountered a strange thing, that I suppose is incorrect behaviour of
> > apt-get. Running 2.2rev0 on i386 from only the Official 1_NONUS CD; apt-get
> > --version: 0.3.19.
>
> Nope, this is about what I'd expect. The command line is not order
> insensitive.
>
> Each argument is evaluated in turn and processed as completely as possible
> before moving on to the next.
Then I suggest that this be changed, since it isn't quite intuitive.
How about if xfonts-75dpi and -100dpi both Provide: x-bitmap-font (and don't
conflict); and xf86setup Depends: x-bitmap-font. Will "apt-get install
xf86setup xfonts-75dpi" then also install -100dpi in random cases when the
Packages(.gz) is ordered differently?
I hope not, since then "apt-get install apache-doc netscape" might install
mozilla as well, which is quite big and I haven't asked for that.
And note that AFAIK Provides: is meant to behave identically to a summed-up
list of |'d packages.
> > (Makes me wonder what happens if A Deps: B | C, and B and C are mutually
> > conflicting and you type "apt-get install A C"...)
>
> It picks C of course..
But probably only after deciding to install B at some intermediate point,
which decision than has to be reversed. Maybe up to the point that it'll list
B under "will be REMOVED" while it isn't installed at all ;-)
Regards,
Anne Bezemer
Reply to: