[EMAIL PROTECTED] (James Troup) wrote on 07.12.97 in <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
[Deleted the part where you once again dodge the question _why_ ldconfig is important] > [dpkg does ordering on configuration and removal, not install] Aah. Now _this_ is a good (and probably sufficient) point. >From this, I'd say that everything needed by dpkg -i MUST pre-depend on any other package that it needs for that functionality used by dpkg -i. We just need to find out what that is. I've just tried to strace dpkg -i libc6, and look at the result; _that_ install needs dpkg (dpkg, dpkg-split, dpkg-deb, libdpkg) gzip tar fileutils (rm) ldso (ldconfig) libc So we'd probably need pre-depends dpkg->(gzip,tar,fileutils)->libc->ldso. Of these, we have tar->libc6, fileutils->libc6, libc6->ldso. By the way, shouldn't Pre-Depends: only be used for Essential: yes packages? I see Pre-Depends: without Essential: in the following packages: libc5, libc6, perl, netstd, elvis-tiny, libreadline2 - probably some of these ought to be essential, and the others not use pre-depends? > > I do agree that gzip should get the predependency, since it doesn't > > make sense for it to be inconsistent with all those other packages. > > Now that is the single most lame reason I've yet to hear for a package > to have a Pre-Depends:. Do I see a "but all those other packages use ldconfig" - "that doesn't mean it's right" type argument here? MfG Kai -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
