> On Sun, Mar 26, 2000 at 11:14:06PM -0300, Nicolás Lichtmaier wrote:
> > > dpkg-divert --package base-files --divert-to /dev.base/hda /dev/hda
> >
> > Ugh.. ugly...
> >
> > The clean solution is to truncate the file list of base, as proposed. This
> > will "release" all the files owned by tha
On Mon, Mar 27, 2000 at 03:25:51PM +0200, Ingo Saitz wrote:
> But this will only work as long as the internal format of dpkg's
> database won't change. But I heard it will definitely be changed
> in the future. So how will you deal with this "change"?
Worry about it when it happens.
Hamish
--
H
On Mon, Mar 27, 2000 at 11:15:50AM +0200, Santiago Vila wrote:
> base-files will truncate base.list if it exists and will tell the user to
> read README.base to remove this package safely (doing it automatically
> would be an ugly hack).
Thanks, that sounds like an excellent solution.
Hamish
--
MoiN
On Sun, Mar 26, 2000 at 11:14:06PM -0300, Nicolás Lichtmaier wrote:
> > dpkg-divert --package base-files --divert-to /dev.base/hda /dev/hda
>
> Ugh.. ugly...
>
> The clean solution is to truncate the file list of base, as proposed. This
> will "release" all the files owned by that packag
reopen 32888
reassign 32888 base-files
On Sun, 26 Mar 2000, Hamish Moffatt wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 26, 2000 at 11:03:27AM -, Debian Bug Tracking System wrote:
> > The base package doesn't exist any more for quite a long time, those first
> > time Debian user are most of them quite good and knows
> dpkg-divert --package base-files --divert-to /dev.base/hda /dev/hda
Ugh.. ugly...
The clean solution is to truncate the file list of base, as proposed. This
will "release" all the files owned by that package safely, with no danger at
all.
On Sun, Mar 26, 2000 at 09:39:09PM +1000, Hamish Moffatt wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 26, 2000 at 11:03:27AM -, Debian Bug Tracking System wrote:
> > The base package doesn't exist any more for quite a long time, those first
> > time Debian user are most of them quite good and knows what to do to
> > c
On Sun, Mar 26, 2000 at 02:53:30PM +0200, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> Yes, because Santiago Vila doesn't want it and because it looks like
> a crude hack.
There is no correlation there. Or if there is, it is a negative one.
--
G. Branden Robinson| If a man ate a pound of pasta and
Le Sun, Mar 26, 2000 at 09:39:09PM +1000, Hamish Moffatt écrivait:
> I think we are closing bugs for the sake of it here. Any reason
> why the suggestion can't be implemented? (ie make base-files.postinst
Yes, because Santiago Vila doesn't want it and because it looks like
a crude hack. If you rea
On Sun, Mar 26, 2000 at 11:03:27AM -, Debian Bug Tracking System wrote:
> The base package doesn't exist any more for quite a long time, those first
> time Debian user are most of them quite good and knows what to do to
> correct this problem. Furthermore for those who can't, they simply have
>
Your message dated Sun, 26 Mar 2000 11:59:12 +0200
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line base mess
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen
11 matches
Mail list logo
