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

Bug#367632: marked as done (libapt-pkg-dev: Please Suggests: or even Recommends: libapt-pkg-doc)

Your message dated Fri, 14 Aug 2015 16:29:22 +0200
with message-id <20150814142922.GA1667@crossbow>
and subject line Re: libapt-pkg-dev: Please Suggests: or even Recommends: libapt-pkg-doc
has caused the Debian Bug report #367632,
regarding libapt-pkg-dev: Please Suggests: or even Recommends: libapt-pkg-doc
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.)


-- 
367632: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=367632
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact owner@bugs.debian.org with problems
--- Begin Message --- 
Package: libapt-pkg-dev
Version: 0.6.38
Severity: minor

Finding out what packages to install when the starting point is "looks
like I need libapt-pkg but what is it and where is it" is overtly
cumbersome. There is no package named just libapt-pkg and the obvious
hit in Google is this package; thus, it would be not only nice but
important that it suggests how to get the missing pieces.

I have looked at the oldstable, stable, and unstable package pages and
they all (predictably) have basically the same dependencies.

Thanks in advance for considering this,

/* era */

-- 
If this were a real .signature, it would suck less.  Well, maybe not.

--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message --- 
Hi,

On Wed, May 17, 2006 at 01:14:17PM +0300, era eriksson wrote:
> Finding out what packages to install when the starting point is "looks
> like I need libapt-pkg but what is it and where is it" is overtly
> cumbersome. There is no package named just libapt-pkg and the obvious
> hit in Google is this package; thus, it would be not only nice but
> important that it suggests how to get the missing pieces.
> 
> I have looked at the oldstable, stable, and unstable package pages and
> they all (predictably) have basically the same dependencies.
> 
> Thanks in advance for considering this,

After nine years of consideration, I guess nobody considered this a good
idea in the end, which is why I am closing this bug as wontfix.

libapt-pkg-dev is perfectly usable without libapt-pkg-doc and I wouldn't
even say that it is suggested to install it just because you had to
install -dev. Its a farly standard pattern to have -doc and -dev
packages, so most people should eventually find it…


Best regards

David Kalnischkies

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature


--- End Message ---
Reply to: