On Sb, 17 aug 13, 19:42:19, Gregory Nowak wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 17, 2013 at 04:36:03PM -0700, Gregory Nowak wrote:
> > Doing apt-get --purge remove
> > doesn't work in these situations.
>
> Oops, I actually meant to say apt-get --purge autoremove, not remove.
It seems this hasn't been addressed: l
On 8/18/13, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
> On Sat, 2013-08-17 at 16:36 -0700, Gregory Nowak wrote:
>> On Sat, Aug 17, 2013 at 06:10:52PM +0200, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
>> > IIRC there's a command that can fake, that an unmet dependency is
>> > fulfilled. I already searched for apt, dpkg, aptitude regarding to
On Sun, 2013-08-18 at 00:37 +0100, "Karl E. Jørgensen" wrote:
> Are you implying that pulseaudio is badly designed? Just
> curios; I have no intention of re-igniting the pulseaudio debates I've
> seen on the mailing lists and forums in the past...
Without discussing the source code, the way pulse
On Sat, 2013-08-17 at 16:36 -0700, Gregory Nowak wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 17, 2013 at 06:10:52PM +0200, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
> > IIRC there's a command that can fake, that an unmet dependency is
> > fulfilled. I already searched for apt, dpkg, aptitude regarding to this
> > subject, but had no success.
On Sat, Aug 17, 2013 at 04:36:03PM -0700, Gregory Nowak wrote:
> Doing apt-get --purge remove
> doesn't work in these situations.
Oops, I actually meant to say apt-get --purge autoremove, not remove.
Greg
--
web site: http://www.gregn.net
gpg public key: http://www.gregn.net/pubkey.asc
skype:
Gregory Nowak writes:
> For example, installing linux-image-686-pae also installs
> linux-image-3.2.0-4-686-pae.
Which implies that linux-image-686-pae depends on
linux-image-3.2.0-4-686-pae.
> However, removing linux-image-686-pae doesn't also remove
> linux-image-3.2.0-4-686-pae.
Why should it
Hi
On 17/08/13 18:42, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
> On Sat, 2013-08-17 at 17:40 +0100, "Karl E. Jørgensen" wrote:
>> Technically, a dummy package is never "needed"
> Hi Karl,
>
> I disagree, in the past years I build a pulseaudio package because it
> was needed. Now I need to fake that pulseaudio and gvfs
On Sat, Aug 17, 2013 at 06:10:52PM +0200, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
> IIRC there's a command that can fake, that an unmet dependency is
> fulfilled. I already searched for apt, dpkg, aptitude regarding to this
> subject, but had no success.
>
> Am I mistake, is a dummy package needed?
I have a question
On Sat, 2013-08-17 at 12:29 -0500, John Hasler wrote:
> Dom writes:
> > I'm not sure if there is anything that can directly bypass
> > dependencies.
>
> "dpkg --force-depends " will. Don't use it.
AFAIK this does not fulfil the dependency, it will cause an inconsistent
system, since it doesn't
On Sat, 2013-08-17 at 17:40 +0100, "Karl E. Jørgensen" wrote:
> Technically, a dummy package is never "needed"
Hi Karl,
I disagree, in the past years I build a pulseaudio package because it
was needed. Now I need to fake that pulseaudio and gvfs are installed,
because Debian and Ubuntu follow ups
Dom writes:
> I'm not sure if there is anything that can directly bypass
> dependencies.
"dpkg --force-depends " will. Don't use it.
--
John Hasler
jhas...@newsguy.com
Elmwood, WI USA
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble?
On 17/08/13 17:10, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
Hi :)
IIRC there's a command that can fake, that an unmet dependency is
fulfilled. I already searched for apt, dpkg, aptitude regarding to this
subject, but had no success.
Am I mistake, is a dummy package needed?
I'm not sure if there is anything that
Hi
On 17/08/13 17:10, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
> Hi :)
>
> IIRC there's a command that can fake, that an unmet dependency is
> fulfilled. I already searched for apt, dpkg, aptitude regarding to this
> subject, but had no success.
>
> Am I mistake, is a dummy package needed?
Well... not a command per se
On 2013-08-17 18:10 +0200, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
> IIRC there's a command that can fake, that an unmet dependency is
> fulfilled. I already searched for apt, dpkg, aptitude regarding to this
> subject, but had no success.
With dpkg you can --force-depends, but then apt will not be happy about
the s
Hi :)
IIRC there's a command that can fake, that an unmet dependency is
fulfilled. I already searched for apt, dpkg, aptitude regarding to this
subject, but had no success.
Am I mistake, is a dummy package needed?
Regards,
Ralf
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org
15 matches
Mail list logo
