On Tue, Mar 01, 2005 at 12:13:56PM -0600, Adam Heath wrote: > On Tue, 1 Mar 2005, Tollef Fog Heen wrote: > > > * Antti-Juhani Kaijanaho > > > > | On 20050228T204520+0000, Andrew Suffield wrote: > > | > On Mon, Feb 28, 2005 at 09:49:41PM +0200, Antti-Juhani Kaijanaho wrote: > > | > > On 20050228T164806+0000, Andrew Suffield wrote: > > | > > > Unfortunately apt breaks the code. If you use dpkg directly it'll > > | > > > work. If you use apt it'll pick a random and unpredictable starting > > | > > > point. > > | > > > > | > > Doesn't apt usually unpack all packages first and then configure them > > in > > | > > one run, so that shouldn't matter? > > | > > > | > dpkg does the same thing > > | > > | So how does apt break it but using dpkg doesn't? > > > > apt invokes dpkg on the command line and due to maximum command line > > length it sometimes is split in an unfortunate place. > > > > This will be fixed once dpkg is librarified. > > Er, no, it won't. > > That part of dpkg is not set to be turned into a library.
Then any plan to impliment command sequence to obtain package name from standard input? $ echo package-1 package-2 | dpkg -i -- - Maybe these are discussed already in BTS.... -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
