On Tuesday 21 August 2018 06:56:45 Vincent Lefevre wrote: > On 2018-08-17 13:48:11 -0500, David Wright wrote: > > On Fri 17 Aug 2018 at 07:31:34 (-0400), Gene Heskett wrote: > > > On Friday 17 August 2018 05:29:07 Vincent Lefevre wrote: > > > > On 2018-08-13 09:38:48 -0300, Samuel Henrique wrote: > > > > > If you pass a file as parameter to apt install, like: > > > > > apt install ./package.deb > > > > > It will work, at least on buster. > > > > > > > > And the "./" is important, otherwise it will not work (until > > > > now, for this reason, I didn't know that passing a file was > > > > supported). I don't know the exact rule, but it seems that the > > > > pathname needs to start with either "/", "./" or "../". > > > > > > The effect is where the search for the given file is anchored > > > just a plain filename is assumed to be someplace in the $PATH > > > > It would be very odd to place a package file into one's $PATH. > > Yes, the use of $PATH is awkward. PATH is where executable files are > searched for. But Debian packages are not executable. > Which is why for dpkg|apt work, you should cd to the location of the deb, and give it the package name in ./name.deb format.
Or, give it /the/full/path/to/the/package/name.deb. > But I doubt that this is true. If I use a plain filename, strace > doesn't show any attempt to look at the file anywhere. Odd, maybe apt does not look in $PATH? That, in some $PATH environments, would be a huge time waster when its not expected to be there anyway. I haven't tried it, but maybe a apt install <name.deb might work? But if it shoots the neighbors cat...? -- Cheers, Gene Heskett -- "There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order." -Ed Howdershelt (Author) Genes Web page <http://geneslinuxbox.net:6309/gene>
