[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Raul Miller) wrote on 26.04.98 in <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Enrique Zanardi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I'm not a dpkg expert, but AFAIK modifying directly the dpkg databases > > (yes, almost everything under var/lib/dpkg are dpkg databases) is a > > Wrong Thing (TM) In the current implementation those databases are > > ASCII files, but that may change (and surely _will_ change) in the > > future, so relying in that format will cause compatibility problems. > > The right way to solve that issue is by adding an(other) option to > > dpkg. > > Um... > > I don't like the idea of making dpkg itself yet more complicated. I think that's the only acceptable way, though (as long as we take dpkg to mean dpkg_*.deb). Ian has in the past said (and I agree, FWIW) that tampering with the dpkg database is extremely evil. This very idea has come up before, incidentally, should be in the archives. I may even have been the one to suggest it. Anyway, Ian was very firmly convinced that this was an extremely bad idea, either way. MfG Kai -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
