On 23 May 1998, Guy Maor wrote: > > Jason Gunthorpe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > I would almost suggest that unless there is a critical reason why > > > libreadlineg conflicts with libreadline that conflicts line be removed so > > > it can order properly in the case of bash being removed. > > > > Has this been discussed with the bash maintainer? We should do an NMU > > if this is definately the right solution and Guy is busy (I hereby > > volunteer, though I'm pretty busy too ;). > > libreadlineg2 conflicts with early versions of libreadline2 because > they include the same files. Newer libreadline2 versions install to > /lib/libc5-compat.
Guy, Can you make it so that libreadlineg2 does not depend on bash for it's configuration - the script is simple enough, I would be happy to write you a C program that is equivilant [just ask]. This implicit dependency on bash creates a configuration dependency loop that is not particularly healty :< If you do this I will be able to make APT configure bash directly after libreadline in this complex case. I think this bug is important enough to have the new package included in hamm ASAP. (Brian?) FYI, the sequence I am thinking of employing is this, Remove libreadline2 unpack libreadline2g configure libreadline2g unpack bash configure bash It is only done if the user requests the removal of libreadline2 from a bo system. Unfortunately right now the removal of libreadline effects several other packages and a bug/flaw in APT's sequencing routine places bash at some random place in this list which is unacceptable and needs to be fixed. Thanks, Jason -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
