> > Explain why I should not expect apt to know about all packages > installed on the computer. You see, in my silly way I assumed that > whenever a package was installed, regardless of what package manager > installed it, it would then be listed in a central database file of > installed apps. Thus, all package managers would know about it. The > whole operating system would know about it. Menu editors would know > about it. Even (gasp!) the user of the computer would be able to find > out about it. There would be no confusion and fragmentation of function. > > Because the package manager is only going to know about the software you installed with it as there's a difference when software is installed from source (not a .deb or .rpm *package*) in which the user may be required to sort out dependencies and conflicts verses letting the package manager logic sort it out.
The level and complexity of the logic, the richness of features and keeping the integrity of installed software intact are the reasons package managers exist. Before then everything was installed / removed by hand. How fun it must have been to be a Sys Admin then. There is however a way to create a virtual package when installing from source which would create a place holder in the package system inventory which would allow you to search the package system for source installed software and to also keep track of all the dependencies. http://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/apt-howto/ch-helpers.en.html#s-equivs _______________________________________________ PLUG mailing list [email protected] http://lists.pdxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug
