On Fri, Mar 14, 2008 at 07:45:06PM +0200, Andrei Popescu wrote: > On Fri, Mar 14, 2008 at 01:41:08AM -0800, Ken Irving wrote: > > > > It seems to that a base install includes 'required' and 'important', > > > while 'standard' will add packages that are considered, well, standard > > > on a *nix system, but won't make it unusable if missing (e.g. bc, > > > openbsd-inetd, ...) > > > > That sounds plausible, but how do you know that? I was curious since > > It's just a guess. For my current install (sid) I used Doug's method[1]: > > 1. Do not select any task > 2. Add just the packages I need in aptitude interactive mode
That's also what I've always done (minus the interactive bit ;-). > Currently I have all packages of priority 'important' and 'required' but > I am missing many 'standard' (I do use replacements for some). The "standard system" option in tasksel is new, but as you suggest it seems to map directly to packages marked with priority Standard. It's curious that it doesn't appear when you run tasksel at a later time, but my perl-foo (in grokking tasksel) isn't up to the task of seeing why that is. > The priorities must be documented somewhere, probably in Policy or > Developers Reference (or both). By face value, the meaning/intent of priorities Required and Important seem clear enough, and Standard seems to make sense too, now that I see what it includes. aptitude makes it easy to see the packages with any set of priorities, and also to install them if desired. > [1] Doug's method is good, but I want to automate it further. I just > have to write a sed script to make the output of 'aptitude search !~M~i' > suitable for 'dpkg --set-selections' I'm not sure that's necessary; if the search pattern yields what you want to install, then just replace the search subcommand with install. Ken -- Ken Irving, [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
