On Mon, Nov 29, 2004 at 12:29:13PM +0100, Bastian Kleineidam wrote: > I consider the current behaviour (ie. print _no_ uri when .deb is > cached) as a bug. At least the behaviour is not documented. > I vote +1 for ignoring cache entries when --print-uris is given. > If the cache ignore is desired, I could try to write a patch for it.
The idea of --print-uris is to give the URIs of files needed to complete the requested operation. It is not a general facility for determining the URI for a .deb file. -- - mdz
