Subject: Mutt dependency on an MTA
Date: Mon, Jul 26, 1999 at 02:55:48PM +0000
In reply to: Kaa "
Quoting Kaa "([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> I have qmail running as an MTA on my potato system. I think I didn't get it
> as a .deb (probably because there isn't one? I am not sure), and just
> downloaded it and installed in /usr/local. Well, yesterday I tried 'apt-get
> install mutt' and guess what? apt refused to download mutt because it
> depends on a "mail-transfer-agent" and such a beast was not to be found in
> dpkg's database. I've tried persuading apt in a variety of ways, but it
> didn't budge: "When I say no, I mean no!". So out of pure frustration I
> installed postfix, which of course, placated apt and I was able to get mutt.
> Now I am quite sure that running qmail and postfix simultaneously isn't the
> greatest of ideas and I'd rather stick with qmail (unless the esteemed
> Debian public thinks that postfix is much better). However I suspect that
> apt will throw a fit if I uninstall postfix and try to leave mutt installed
> (and getting upgrades will probably hurt, too). So, can somebody tell me how
> to persuade apt to let me use mutt with a non-deb qmail?
>
> Kaa
The offical Debian way (TM), would be to use the equivs package to
'fool' the system into thinking you had a valid MTA installed. As
when I tried that, it didn't work, I did it the "un-approved" way
(not recommended for anyone but me (TM) ).
I first removes all dpkg known MTA's.
I went into /var/lib/dpkg/status
and found
Package: smail
Status: deinstall ok config-files
and manually changed it to
Package: smail
Status: install ok installed
Then installed qmail and mutt without problems.
I then documented this in my private log so as not to forget what I
had done.
HTH, YMMV, HAND
--
A LISP programmer knows the value of everything, but the cost of
nothing.
_______________________________________________________
Wayne T. Topa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
