On Mon, Oct 22, 2007 at 10:58:36 -0700, Andrew Sackville-West wrote: > On Mon, Oct 22, 2007 at 06:05:18PM +0200, Florian Kulzer wrote: > > On Mon, Oct 22, 2007 at 08:25:40 -0700, Andrew Sackville-West wrote:
[...] > > > is this the new "I'm so 1337" d-u bragging stick? How many recommends > > > can you get rid of? How stripped down is your system? I bet I an get > > > over 400!!! > > > > Oh yeah, you think you're tough? > > > > Why don't we taken it from "recommends" to real dependencies then: > > > > $ aptitude search '!~i~R~i' | wc -l > > 369 > > > > and my system is as solid as a rø$%&Ñ¿? > > > > +++++ CARRIER LOST +++++ > > > roflol. > > I'm home sick futzing around with my laptop and you've made my > day. thanks! (Get well soon!) Before too many people get annoyed with this, let me quickly clarify that I forgot the "B" qualifier in the search pattern that I proposed initially. If you want to find missing recommendations which are not satisfied by any installed package, it is better to use !~i~RBrecommends:~i as the search pattern. Using "B" also leads to the expected result for the dependencies: $ aptitude search '!~i~RB~i' | wc -l 0 -- Regards, | http://users.icfo.es/Florian.Kulzer Florian |
