Colin Watson wrote:
On Mon, Aug 23, 2004 at 11:14:21AM +0200, Harald Dunkel wrote:
Colin Watson wrote:
On Thu, Aug 19, 2004 at 02:45:14PM +0200, Harald Dunkel wrote:
Whats behind the story about libc-udeb vs libc6? Several udebs depend
upon libc6, even though this package is not included in d-i, e.g.
busybox-cvs-udeb, dash-udeb, etc. Other tools depend on libc-udeb as
expected (e.g. nano-udeb).
libc6-udeb provides libc6, so it doesn't matter. The dependencies on
libc6 are mostly generated automatically using the shlibdeps mechanism.
Yes, libc6-udeb provides "libc6", but dash-udeb depends on
"libc6 (>= 2.3.2.ds1-4)", which is not(!!!) provided by
libc6-udeb.
apt-get does not allow versioned dependencies to be satisfied by
provides. However, anna (which is used in place of apt for udeb
retrieval by debian-installer) does allow this. Testing with apt-get
will not give you useful answers.
Sorry, I am still trying to become familiar with d-i's build
procedure. AFAIK anna is not used for building d-i, but at
d-i's runtime. Building d-i requires apt-get to download and
install udebs, e.g. in the top level get-packages script.
The only reason why you haven't got an error message at d-i's
build time about a missing libc6 is because usually libc6 is
already installed in your system.
Anyway, I am not interested in making the error message disappear
somehow. I was talking about getting rid of the inconsistency in
d-i's build environment. Surely it is not OK that the
Packages file in main/debian-installer contains dependencies to
external *.deb files.
Especially note that there is no request from my side to fix this
for Sarge.
Regards
Harri
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
