Just curious, is it best that apt-get, aware that there is a newer version of a program, still no questions asked, just tries again to install the old stuck version --- would any variation in that behavior have any even wishlist merit?
>>>>> "M" == Matt Zimmerman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: M> On Mon, Aug 18, 2003 at 07:11:17AM +0800, Dan Jacobson wrote: >> Package: apt >> Version: 0.5.9 >> Severity: normal >> File: /usr/bin/apt-get >> >> Consider the case of netbase 4.11, a package with a broken script that >> fails configuration. >> >> Then one does apt-get update and 4.13 is now the candidate as seen in >> apt-cache policy. M> apt always tries to fix any broken packages on the system (or let you M> specify a solution) before letting you try to install new ones. This is a M> feature. It is not installing anything; it is only trying to configure the M> package which was already unpacked on your system, and failed to configure M> previously. M> Did you consider copying and pasting the output showing exactly what apt was M> doing, rather than trying to explain what you thought it was doing? That M> would have saved me the guesswork of figuring out what you were talking M> about. M> I am not going to provide technical support to you through the BTS. Your M> bug reports are not contributing to the development process. So, please do M> not file any more bug reports against apt. If you have a question about why M> apt is behaving a certain way, ask on [EMAIL PROTECTED] Do not M> file a bug report. Is this clear? M> -- M> - mdz -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
