[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Bug#587620: marked as done (apt: add an optionnal "Why" field to "suggest" entries (in the dependency field))

Your message dated Fri, 14 Aug 2015 00:01:51 +0200
with message-id <20150814000131.GA13954@debian.org>
and subject line Re: Bug#587620: apt: add an optionnal "Why" field to "suggest" entries (in the dependency field)
has caused the Debian Bug report #587620,
regarding apt: add an optionnal "Why" field to "suggest" entries (in the dependency field)
to be marked as done.

This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.

(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact owner@bugs.debian.org
immediately.)


-- 
587620: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=587620
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact owner@bugs.debian.org with problems
--- Begin Message --- 
Package: apt
Version: 0.7.25.3
Severity: wishlist

Hello,

Sometimes, from a user point of view, understanding  why a package A recommends
or suggests package B1 or B2 is not straightforward.

It would be nice to add  an optionnal  "why" field to explain what features are
enabled in package A when installing package B1.

Ideally, this could be displayed when the user calls : apt-cache show or looks
at the package data in another front-end for apt. This way, they would know
from the start if they want to install package B1 all along, when installing A.

Best regards,

Alexandre Fournier



-- Package-specific info:

-- apt-config dump --

APT "";
APT::Architecture "amd64";
APT::Build-Essential "";
APT::Build-Essential:: "build-essential";
APT::Install-Recommends "1";
APT::Install-Suggests "0";
APT::Acquire "";
APT::Acquire::Translation "environment";
APT::Authentication "";
APT::Authentication::TrustCDROM "true";
APT::NeverAutoRemove "";
APT::NeverAutoRemove:: "^linux-image.*";
APT::NeverAutoRemove:: "^linux-restricted-modules.*";
APT::NeverAutoRemove:: "^kfreebsd-image.*";
Dir "/";
Dir::State "var/lib/apt/";
Dir::State::lists "lists/";
Dir::State::cdroms "cdroms.list";
Dir::State::userstatus "status.user";
Dir::State::status "/var/lib/dpkg/status";
Dir::Cache "var/cache/apt/";
Dir::Cache::archives "archives/";
Dir::Cache::srcpkgcache "srcpkgcache.bin";
Dir::Cache::pkgcache "pkgcache.bin";
Dir::Etc "etc/apt/";
Dir::Etc::sourcelist "sources.list";
Dir::Etc::sourceparts "sources.list.d";
Dir::Etc::vendorlist "vendors.list";
Dir::Etc::vendorparts "vendors.list.d";
Dir::Etc::main "apt.conf";
Dir::Etc::netrc "auth.conf";
Dir::Etc::parts "apt.conf.d";
Dir::Etc::preferences "preferences";
Dir::Etc::preferencesparts "preferences.d";
Dir::Bin "";
Dir::Bin::methods "/usr/lib/apt/methods";
Dir::Bin::dpkg "/usr/bin/dpkg";
Dir::Media "";
Dir::Media::MountPath "/media/apt";
Dir::Log "var/log/apt";
Dir::Log::Terminal "term.log";
DPkg "";
DPkg::Pre-Install-Pkgs "";
DPkg::Pre-Install-Pkgs:: "/usr/sbin/apt-listbugs apt || exit 10";
DPkg::Pre-Install-Pkgs:: "/usr/sbin/dpkg-preconfigure --apt || true";
DPkg::Tools "";
DPkg::Tools::Options "";
DPkg::Tools::Options::/usr/sbin/apt-listbugs "";
DPkg::Tools::Options::/usr/sbin/apt-listbugs::Version "2";

-- (no /etc/apt/preferences present) --


-- /etc/apt/sources.list --

# deb http://ftp.fr.debian.org/debian/ lenny main

deb http://ftp.debian.org/debian/ testing main non-free contrib
deb-src http://ftp.debian.org/debian/ testing main

deb http://security.debian.org/ testing/updates main
deb-src http://security.debian.org/ testing/updates main

#deb http://volatile.debian.org/debian-volatile lenny/volatile main
#deb-src http://volatile.debian.org/debian-volatile lenny/volatile main

deb http://ftp.debian.org/debian experimental main
deb http://condor.infra.s1.p.fti.net/dop sarge ke-preprod
deb ftp://ftp.debian-multimedia.org testing main non-free

-- System Information:
Debian Release: squeeze/sid
  APT prefers testing
  APT policy: (500, 'testing'), (1, 'experimental')
Architecture: amd64 (x86_64)

Kernel: Linux 2.6.32-5-amd64 (SMP w/1 CPU core)
Locale: LANG=fr_FR.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=fr_FR.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8)
Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/dash

Versions of packages apt depends on:
ii  debian-archive-keyring        2009.01.31 GnuPG archive keys of the Debian a
ii  libc6                         2.11.1-3   Embedded GNU C Library: Shared lib
ii  libgcc1                       1:4.5.0-1  GCC support library
ii  libstdc++6                    4.5.0-1    The GNU Standard C++ Library v3

apt recommends no packages.

Versions of packages apt suggests:
pn  apt-doc                       <none>     (no description available)
ii  aptitude                      0.6.1.5-3  terminal-based package manager (te
ii  bzip2                         1.0.5-4    high-quality block-sorting file co
pn  dpkg-dev                      <none>     (no description available)
ii  lzma                          4.43-14    Compression method of 7z format in
ii  python-apt                    0.7.95     Python interface to libapt-pkg
ii  synaptic                      0.63.1     Graphical package manager

-- no debconf information

--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message --- 
On Wed, Jun 30, 2010 at 04:44:23PM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
> Alexandre Fournier <brutus@free.fr> writes:
> 
> > Package: apt
> > Version: 0.7.25.3
> > Severity: wishlist
> >
> > Hello,
> >
> > Sometimes, from a user point of view, understanding  why a package A recommends
> > or suggests package B1 or B2 is not straightforward.
> >
> > It would be nice to add  an optionnal  "why" field to explain what features are
> > enabled in package A when installing package B1.
> >
> > Ideally, this could be displayed when the user calls : apt-cache show or looks
> > at the package data in another front-end for apt. This way, they would know
> > from the start if they want to install package B1 all along, when installing A.
> >
> > Best regards,
> >
> > Alexandre Fournier
> 
> Imho that is not something that affects apt.

That's true, and I'm now closing this bug.

> 
> First you should make a proposal to introduce the WHY field in packages
> and get them to adopt it. Probably best to write to debian-devel and
> build a consensus. This can be done first as custom field even
> without needing to patch dpkg for a new field. The field would
> automatically be shown by apt-cache too. So you are already most of the
> way there.
> 
> Only once the WHY field is in use in a large number of apckages
> front-ends could be changed to support it. But that would be a bug for
> aptitude, adept, cupts, ... rather than apt itself.
> 
> MfG
>         Goswin
> 
> 
> 

-- 
Julian Andres Klode  - Debian Developer, Ubuntu Member

See http://wiki.debian.org/JulianAndresKlode and http://jak-linux.org/.

Be friendly, do not top-post, and follow RFC 1855 "Netiquette".
    - If you don't I might ignore you.

--- End Message ---
Reply to: