07.01.2012 09:18, LinuxBSDos.com skrev:
True that the user does not and should not care about definitions of an orphan, but also, the user should not be put in a situation where he/she will have to go hunting for what could or could not break anything.
Well urpme is not at fault. It's doing exactly what it's told. It cant solve packager errors. If a packager has forgot a "Requires", urpmi does not know that. The only things --auto-orphans has to go on is: 1. is the package on the "keep list" such as basesystem -> dont remove. 2. is the package required by some other package -> dont remove. 3. is the package manually installed with urpmi/rpmdrake -> dont remove. 4. is the package the current running kernel -> dont remove. So, if you find your system would be broken (or got broken) by running urpme --auto-orphans (or the same function in rpmdrake), and you want it fixed, file bug reports. And not against urpmi/rpmdrake, but the package that stopped working. -- Thomas
