On 23 July 2010 11:22, Corinna Vinschen wrote: > On Jul 23 09:15, Andy Koppe wrote: >> On 23 July 2010 05:59, Christopher Faylor wrote: >> > On Fri, Jul 23, 2010 at 05:38:24AM +0100, Andy Koppe wrote: >> >>Unmet Dependencies Found [in bold] >> >>The following packages are required but have not been selected. >> >> >> >>Package: binutils >> >> Required by: gcc4-g++ >> >> >> >>Package: gcc4-core >> >> Required by: gcc4-g++ >> >> >> >>[tickbox] Install these packages to meet dependencies (RECOMMENDED) >> >> >> >>(That tickbox is pre-ticked. If you untick it and click Next you get >> >>an appropriate warning about breaking your installation.) >> >> >> >>I think that's okay(ish), although sensitive users might read the >> >>sentence above the list as accusing them of failing to add the >> >>dependencies. How about "The following packages are required to >> >>satisfy dependencies of your selection."? >> > >> > That sounds ok I guess. Please check this in and I'll roll a new >> > setup.exe release. >> >> I don't think I've got commit access. > > I've applied the patch.
Thanks! Do we still want to tweak the wording? Andy
