Once upon a time Steve Langasek said... > > There is nothing in the -source package that actually requires (or should > recommend) the -utils package. A much better fix here is for people to get > over the fact that dpkg isn't apt.
Apologies for continuing this but having read through the thread I still dont think I understand the issue with dpkg in this situation. Is the following scenario the issue here with dpkg? : foo-modules_1.0 is installed. It is standalone and does not require any other packages to be installed. foo-modules_2.0 is built from foo-source. foo-modules_2.0 depends on foo-utils. User runs "dpkg -i foo-modules_2.0_arch.deb" dpkg first removes foo-modules_1.0 dpkg then check dependencies of foo-modules_2.0 dpkg complains that foo-utils is not installed and aborts the installation of foo-modules_2.0 foo-modules is now in a broken state unable to be used. Networking depends on foo-modules so it is not possible to install foo-utils unless it is locally available. Is this the scenario being argued over? If so, why does dpkg not first check the dependencies of foo-modules_2.0 before removing foo-modules_1.0? If not, could someone explain to me (or point me to a resource) what the issue is? Thanks -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
