On Dec 16, 2003, at 12:04 AM, Martin Costabel wrote:
Except that in the case at hand mutt was not installed at all. Only its config files were left, beause it was not purged. I would consider this at least counter-intuitive behaviour (not to say bug) that fink in this case refuses to install (and doesn't tell why), because it takes its information about what version is the latest available one from some body count in dpkg's database and not from its own.
dpkg's database is the only database of installed files. Fink does not
We were not talking about installed files, but about files avialable for installation.
keep one. (nor could it, currently) Fink's own database only tracks info files (for source building). Fink can't know what is installed without trusting dpkg because users can install via apt-get or dpkg directly.
I am sorry, but when you type "fink install foo" and you get a message
can't install foo-x.y-z because no package description of version foo-x.y-z is available
you get the impression that something is not right, whatever the interior mechanism is. You always ask "why does it try to install version x.y-z when it damn well knows that this doesn't exist?"
We do a 'fink purge' command for purging configuration files..
Yeah, and who is using it? You use it when you need to, but in the case at hand nobody told the user that this was a problem.
-- Martin
------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: IBM Linux Tutorials. Become an expert in LINUX or just sharpen your skills. Sign up for IBM's Free Linux Tutorials. Learn everything from the bash shell to sys admin. Click now! http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=1278&alloc_id=3371&op=click _______________________________________________ Fink-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-users
