> From: Johannes Plass <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: Re: Annoying package dependence concept
>
> Joe Emenaker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Yes it does. You can hit "Q" to force dselect to accept things as you
> > have chosen.
>
> Pre
Johannes Plass:
> and xdvi (why actually does xdvi depend on ghostscript ?)
Xdvi can show Postscript graphics included in a TeX document. It
needs ghostscript to do so. "Recommends: ghostscript" might
be too strong for xdvi; "Suggests: ghostscript" would be much
better, since xdvi works well
On Sat, 26 Oct 1996, Joe Emenaker wrote:
> > But as it is currently, maintaining a Debian system by using
> > deselect is a real pain ...
>
> Actually, it's really nice for me. It automatically notes new packages that
> have been updated and lets me download and install them with less than 10
> o
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (John Hasler) writes:
> Guy Maor writes:
> > See the Programmer's Manual, section 8.2.
>
> I don't have anything identifying itself as the Programmer's Manual. Where
> is it found?
Look on the Web site, under "Documentation". For a direct URL, try
http://www.debian.or
J.H.M.Dassen wrote:
> If you don't like 'dselect', you can always use 'dpkg' (the lower-level
> utility); 'dpkg' allows you to override dependencies.
> (In fact, I've used dpkg since before dselect, and only learned to use
> dselect lately (a SLiRP connection now allows me to keep stuff up to date
> Guy Maor writes:
> > That's because dselect treats recommendations as dependencies,...
I wrote:
> Why?
Guy Maor writes:
> See the Programmer's Manual, section 8.2.
I don't have anything identifying itself as the Programmer's Manual. Where
is it found?
John Hasler
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (John Hasl
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (John Hasler) writes:
> Guy Maor writes:
> > That's because dselect treats recommendations as dependencies,...
>
> Why?
See the Programmer's Manual, section 8.2.
Guy
--
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mai
Guy Maor writes:
> That's because dselect treats recommendations as dependencies,...
Why?
John Hasler
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (John Hasler)
Dancing Horse Hill
Elmwood, WI
--
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Joe Emenaker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Yes it does. You can hit "Q" to force dselect to accept things as you
> have chosen.
Pressing "Q" causes dselect to momentarily forget about dependency
conflicts.
When installing the packages the user will certainly get lots of error
messages
related to u
>Actually, it's really nice for me. It automatically notes new packages that
>have been updated and lets me download and install them with less than 10
>or so keypresses whether there are 2 upgraded packages or 200.
Sorry, I've been away for a while.
Dselect is nice, but I really think the
I agree wholeheartedly! I am a beta-tester for XFree86 and update
by distribution about twice a week with new alpha releases.
Every time I run "make Everythingl make install", I overwrite debian
libraries and binaries. I am going to have to d/load XFree86 3.2 in
debian form, even though I have 70+
> From: Johannes Plass <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> Debian's realization of package dependencies is, in my opinion,
> too tight.
> Two (out of many possible) examples may illustrate my point:
[ snip ]
> The basic problem is that deselect doesn't allow to override
> any dependencies specified by packa
"Joe Emenaker" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> dpkg *does* seem to sometimes
> enforce some package dependencies, but that has only happened to me once.
That's because dselect treats recommendations as dependencies, but
dpkg only treats them as suggestions. See Programmer's Manul 8.2.
Guy
--
TO
> From: Johannes Plass <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> Debian's realization of package dependencies is, in my opinion,
> too tight.
> Two (out of many possible) examples may illustrate my point:
[ snip ]
> The basic problem is that deselect doesn't allow to override
> any dependencies specified by pack
On Sat, 26 Oct 1996, Johannes Plass wrote:
> The basic problem is that deselect doesn't allow to override
> any dependencies specified by package maintainers. This, however,
> is necessary since package dependencies
>- may already be satisfied by local software deselect doesn't
> know abo
David Puryear writes:
> Xdvi dose not "depend" on ghostscript but "recommend" it.
It *says* it "recommends" it. It behaves as though it requires it. I
perceive no functional difference between "recommends" and "requires".
> Here is where libpaper is:
> ftp://ftp.debian.org/debian/unstable/binar
[Johannes complained about dselect not allowing you to override
dependencies]
> But as it is currently, maintaining a Debian system by using
> deselect is a real pain ...
'dselect' is aimed at normal users, and what you see as restrictions
in at, can also be seen as preventive measures.
If you d
Hi Johannes
You wrote:
>
> Debian's realization of package dependencies is, in my opinion,
> too tight.
> Two (out of many possible) examples may illustrate my point:
>- A user doesn't want to install Debian's ghostscript since
> he is a ghostscript beta tester and has a newer version
>
Debian's realization of package dependencies is, in my opinion,
too tight.
Two (out of many possible) examples may illustrate my point:
- A user doesn't want to install Debian's ghostscript since
he is a ghostscript beta tester and has a newer version
than Debian provides.
However
19 matches
Mail list logo
