On Tue, Aug 18, 2009 at 10:47:22AM -0400, Sven Joachim wrote: > > malaclypse:~# grep emacs /var/log/aptitude > > [INSTALL, DEPENDENCIES] emacs23-bin-common > > [INSTALL, DEPENDENCIES] emacs23-common > > [INSTALL, DEPENDENCIES] emacs23-nox > > [UPGRADE] emacs 22.3+1-1.1 -> 23.1+1-2 > > FWIW, I could reproduce this in a Squeeze chroot, although I had > emacs22-nox installed there. But AFAICS this is not a bug in emacs which > depends on emacs23 | emacs23-gtk | emacs23-nox.
But shouldn't emacs pull in the X version if I don't have any emacs*-nox installed? Especially if the action replaces the default "emacs" command with a non-X version. > It's probably not that the dependencies aren't installable (try > "aptitude install emacs23" to find out -- it would have worked for me), > but rather that aptitude chose a solution that does not involve > installing additional packages (the emacs23 package has more > dependencies than emacs22). You're correct, it is installable (I was responding to the previous comments). I fixed my installation by installing emacs23 and things are working fine. > BTW, how did you upgrade? I did with "aptitude safe-upgrade", it is > possible that "aptitude full-upgrade" or "aptitude install emacs" would > have had a different outcome. I did "aptitude safe-upgrade". > A final tip for you: install emacs23-gtk instead of emacs23, GTK+ is the > preferred toolkit by upstream (see #539800). Okay, cool - I'll check that out. Ross
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
