hey karsten,
it seems reinstalling lenny from scratch, but this time without
'desktop' will give me a better chance to get puredyne running ?
cheers,
jan-kees
krgn wrote:
uh, i nuked one or another fedora install. it wasn't hard when I tried
(especially when trying to install rpms that were non-standard from
elsewhere), but I seem to have heard from places that rpm got better.
whatevva.. that circular dependency thing is annoying in a way. but
renaming libs entirely, snap!, just like that seems like really bad
practice to me. then again... I wouldn't necessarily want to create and
maintain all those packages cm does myself if I don't have to. ... .. if
I don't have to...
On Wed, Jul 23, 2008 at 2:25 PM, Atwood, Robert C
<[EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> wrote:
Its an annoyance I also find with main Debian , I had some circular
dependency issue with Jack/fftw3/ardour/ and it did have to do with
package nameing changes. Also the strange application of strict
policy that means Jack is split into program and library packs where
there is no conceivable use of the program without the library (what
clients could use the demon without using the library???) made it
difficult to build my own the 'debian way' in order to satisfy the
deps -- also they named the jack pack with a version number that
does not reflect the version that is actually in the pack! Im sure
it seemed like a good idea at the time.
However these annoyances are so far smaller than the annoyances I
have experience with other major distros -RedHat, Suse, Slackware ,
but it's not jsut with the external MM repo but the main trunk too;
its not quite as bad as RPM dependency-hell!
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on behalf of krgn
Sent: Tue 22/07/2008 8:43 PM
To: p:d
Subject: Re: [pure:dyne] from lenny to p:d, what am i missing ?
hey rob!! those are broken because of debian multimedia changing
names of
packages. how annoying. I'm making tickets.
On Tue, Jul 22, 2008 at 7:21 AM, Atwood, Robert C
<[EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>>
wrote:
>
> Yes I get a catch-22 situation, since installing pd-pidip requires
> liblame0, installing liblame0 removes pd-pdp, and puredyne-puredata
> includes both of these pd-pidip and pd-pdp.
>
> # apt-get install liblame0
> ...
> The following packages will be REMOVED
> libavcodec51 libmp3lame0 libquicktime1 pd-pdp
> The following NEW packages will be installed
> liblame0
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of jan-kees van
kampen
> > Sent: 22 July 2008 12:16
> > To: [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
> > Subject: Re: [pure:dyne] from lenny to p:d, what am i missing ?
> >
> > krgn wrote:
> > > I recommend trying to look at the
> > > packages that are dependencies of the "puredyne" metapackage and
> > > installing them manually and see if you get any further.
> > >
> > > aptitude show puredyne
> >
> > i'm afraid of running into conflicts, and it's realy a lot of deps
> >
> > > it would also be useful if you posted the output of the aptitude
> > > installation command, too, just to confirm or disprove my
> > suspicion ;-).
> >
> > ok, i attached the output,
> >
> > jk
> >
>
> ---
> [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
> irc.goto10.org <http://irc.goto10.org> #pure:dyne
>
---
[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
irc.goto10.org <http://irc.goto10.org> #pure:dyne
------------------------------------------------------------------------
---
[email protected]
irc.goto10.org #pure:dyne
---
[email protected]
irc.goto10.org #pure:dyne
