On Tue, 12 Sep 2000, Jason Gunthorpe wrote: > On Wed, 13 Sep 2000, J.A. Bezemer wrote: > > > Just encountered a strange thing, that I suppose is incorrect behaviour of > > apt-get. Running 2.2rev0 on i386 from only the Official 1_NONUS CD; apt-get > > --version: 0.3.19. > > Nope, this is about what I'd expect. The command line is not order > insensitive. > > Each argument is evaluated in turn and processed as completely as possible > before moving on to the next.
Then I suggest that this be changed, since it isn't quite intuitive. How about if xfonts-75dpi and -100dpi both Provide: x-bitmap-font (and don't conflict); and xf86setup Depends: x-bitmap-font. Will "apt-get install xf86setup xfonts-75dpi" then also install -100dpi in random cases when the Packages(.gz) is ordered differently? I hope not, since then "apt-get install apache-doc netscape" might install mozilla as well, which is quite big and I haven't asked for that. And note that AFAIK Provides: is meant to behave identically to a summed-up list of |'d packages. > > (Makes me wonder what happens if A Deps: B | C, and B and C are mutually > > conflicting and you type "apt-get install A C"...) > > It picks C of course.. But probably only after deciding to install B at some intermediate point, which decision than has to be reversed. Maybe up to the point that it'll list B under "will be REMOVED" while it isn't installed at all ;-) Regards, Anne Bezemer
