reopen 34223 severity 34223 normal thanks On Tue, 26 Oct 1999, Julian Gilbey wrote:
> Santiago indicated a contradiction between APT's behaviour and the > packaging manual. Santiago: could you suggest a rewording of the > packaging manual which would resolve this issue? Simple answer: No, this is not my problem ;-) Detailed answer: I can suggest a rewording of the packaging manual which does not make it to deviate from its original spirit and makes APT behaviour almost-compliant to it. Packaging manual says: The install script should feed all the available .deb files to dpkg --iGOEB (this is equivalent to dpkg --install --refuse-downgrade --selected-only --skip-same-version --auto-deconfigure). The -R (--recursive) option for traversing subdirectories may also be useful here). I would suggest to add something like this: Clever dselect methods (for example, those who do package ordering) are allowed to do this differently if they do the same by other means. It should be understood or made explicit that removing an essential package is not doing the same, because you can't never remove an essential package by calling dpkg --iGOEB. I think Jason will not like this wording because it does not allow removing an essential package. I think APT should not allow the user to remove an essential package and packaging manual should not bless current APT behaviour, so, as I said before, I'm sorry but I'm unable to suggest a rewording of packaging manual which would resolve this issue. I still think this is a grave bug in APT. Thanks. -- "5768b48d9bee1cb407a4f4ca7c80e787" (a truly random sig)
