On Thu, Mar 02, 2000 at 01:17:47PM +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Thierry Laronde <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 02 Mar, 2000 12:38 > > > > Well, there are two problems : > > > > 1) It's much more difficult to change the internals of dpkg > > than to use some > > tricks in order to implement these "security updates". So, > > with my proposal, > > I'm not quite sure that a prompt would be in some way feasible ; > > Maybe that can be arranged by definition: > - if > dpkg or dselect or apt or swim (or ...) somewhere near > the end complains about dependencies that cannot be met > for packages on hold > then > we may be able to modify the message to indicate that > this may mean that a security update is needed > > >[..] > > The situation seems to be slightly complicated by the fact > that we have several tools and combinations of tools to do > basically the same job. Have you checked dpkgV2 spec? Will > this be any easier then? > > If we find that there is at least one tool or combination of > tools that does the job then we can recommend that. Then users > and admins can take this info in consideration when selecting > their tools and planning their work procedures.
I have not, at the moment, looked at the code. But --- for another reason --- I want to give a look to apt. If I have the time, I will search if our propositions are feasible. Cheers, -- Thierry LARONDE <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 10, rue du Bel Air, 74000 ANNECY / Tel.-Fax : 33.(0)4.50.67.46.61 website : http://www.polynum.com /home du SDF (Site Debian Francophone) : http://www.polynum.com/debian/
