Op ma, 10-01-2005 te 22:43 +0200, schreef George Danchev:
> On Monday 10 January 2005 22:25, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> > Op ma, 10-01-2005 te 15:12 -0500, schreef William Ballard:
> > > On Mon, Jan 10, 2005 at 08:33:02PM +0100, Tollef Fog Heen wrote:
> > > > dpkg -I on the resulting package and looking at the depends?
> > >
> > > But you don't expect to do that for other packages.
> >
> > You can also just run 'apt-get -f install' once the dependency breakage
> > occurs. That's what it's for.
>
> This should be the last one should try, e.g. break the things with dpkg -i
> and
> then try to fix them with apt-get install -f, what if you have just broke
> apt ... yes I know one can handle that, but why spending extra time in a-la
> rpm hell [tm] situations, which could be avoided easily... The right way [tm]
> is to place the resulting deb in a local apt repo and install & whatever from
> there exploring the advantages of apt.
That's a possibility, but it's hardly 'the right way', IMO. Setting up a
local package repository is a bit overkill IMHO.
If installing a package with dpkg -i breaks apt, that means there's
something fishy going on, and would warrant a bug report IMO, with its
severity being at least 'important'. Apart from that...
--
EARTH
smog | bricks
AIR -- mud -- FIRE
soda water | tequila
WATER
-- with thanks to fortune
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
