> Since, AFAICT, dependencies are always installed, and the only difference
> the button makes is whether or not they are shown as selected in the
> package selection list, how about:
>
> "Show automatically-selected packages"
I like it
Michael Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> "Show automatically-selected packages"
i like it. Quite long though, but can't find anything shorter...
Sounds reasonable to me!
Randy Kramer
Michael Brown wrote:
> Since, AFAICT, dependencies are always installed, and the only difference
> the button makes is whether or not they are shown as selected in the
> package selection list, how about:
>
> "Show automatically-selected packages"
>
> This
On Thu, 22 Mar 2001, Randy Kramer wrote:
> Does it only select, or does it also download and/or install? If so,
> (and without having tried the program), I'd like words that convey the
> full range of activity. (More like "automatically install other
> required programs", or "get and install req
How about
"Automatically install necessary support packages (recommended)"
Aaron Cohen wrote:
> How about: "Silently select dependencies." ?
>
>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>> Sent: Wednesday, March 21, 2001 6:09 AM
>> To: [EMAIL PROTECT
Does it only select, or does it also download and/or install? If so,
(and without having tried the program), I'd like words that convey the
full range of activity. (More like "automatically install other
required programs", or "get and install requirements"). If the next
step is to download and
How about: "Silently select dependencies." ?
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Wednesday, March 21, 2001 6:09 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: [Cooker] RFC DrakX package selection tree
>
>
> the checkbox "Automatic dependencies" see
"No dependencies warnings" would make me think that it was going to "force"
the install without installing the packages it depended on and not tell me
about it, which is probably not what it is really doing (or, I could be one
of the people who doesn't understand what it means. ;-)
If it means "
On Wednesday 21 March 2001 13:08, you wrote:
> the checkbox "Automatic dependencies" seems badly understood.
>
> Any better words?
>
> "Silent dependencies", "No dependencies warnings"???
>
>
>
> thanks, cu Pixel.
Hi
Dependencies among packages checked
regards
guran
