>>>>> "OS" == Otavio Salvador <ota...@ossystems.com.br> writes:
OS> retitle 557322 Improve manpage to explain that --exclude doesn't
OS> affects dependency resolution thanks
[...]
IS> However, it seems that it doesn't allow, say, initscripts & co. to
IS> be excluded:
>> # debootstrap --verbose --variant=minbase \
>> --exclude=initscripts,sysv{-rc,init{,-utils}},login,mount \
>> --include=bind9-host,bzip2,gawk,less,psmisc,tree,zip \
>> --keep-debootstrap-dir \
>> --print-debs \
>> lenny \
>> /tmp/$(date +%s)/ \
>> file:/com/waterlily.public/debian/
>> I: Retrieving Release
>> I: Retrieving Packages
>> I: Validating Packages
>> I: Resolving dependencies of required packages...
>> I: Resolving dependencies of base packages...
>> I: Found additional base dependencies: debian-archive-keyring gnupg gpgv
>> libbind9-40 libbz2-1.0 libcap2 libdns45 libisc45 libisccc40 libisccfg40
>> libkeyutils1 libkrb53 liblwres40 libreadline5 libssl0.9.8 libusb-0.1-4
>> libxml2 readline-common
[...]
OS> To you exclude a package you also need to exclude all one that
OS> depends on it otherwise it will be added back into the installation
OS> list by the dependency resolution code.
Is it really the whole problem? What other package(s) I should
--exclude= as well considering the case above?
OS> I'm changing the title of the bug to improve this part of the
OS> manpage since it ought to be cited there to avoid confusion.
Please note that:
* the ``Found additional base dependencies:'' line doesn't
report any of the `--exclude='d packages among those brought
by the dependencies;
* chroot(8)ing into the system and `apt-get remove'ing the very
same set of packages:
# apt-get remove initscripts sysv{-rc,init{,-utils}} login mount
doesn't remove any package out of this set; (though it
complains on essentiality, of course.)
TIA.
--
FSF associate member #7257
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
