On 13 Apr 1998, Kai Henningsen wrote: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Juan Cespedes) wrote on 13.04.98 in <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > I still think it's the correct way to do this. > > I think the right thing to do (but surely not the easiest one) is to have > apt do _all_ dependency calculations, and dpkg none.
Well, dpkg does a set of 'safety' checks and that is good, anything that passes through my checks will be caught by dpkg. > Of course, this collides with everything that currently interfaces dpkg, > so it's more of a long-term goal. Actually, it's exactly what I do now. dpkg could work better (see email about pipe interface). APT takes care of dependancy checking and ordering and it works pretty well. What Juan is thinking of implementing is effectively already done by APT's ordering code for all the cases where it is possible to do it. Also the bugs Juan is trying to fix are non-issues if apt-get is used, it does complete checking of the target state before even starting dpkg. > And apt needs some way to deal with broken packages - what dpkg does with > --force and stuff. I'm not quite certain what would be the best way to do > this, though, given all the side effects propagated around by the > dependency network. Maybe some way for a local config file to override > dependencies for specific versions of specific packages? It could look > like this: I was thinking of an override file, but I would just completely ignore packages and hope that dpkg does not upset. If you want to install something that is broken then you force it in place with dpkg and then ignore it in apt. Jason -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
