On Mon, 2003-09-01 at 02:05, Bob Proulx wrote:
> Marc Wilson wrote:
> > Neal Lippman wrote:
> > > I did in install last pm of a package which "recommends" other packages,
> > > which it turned out I needed in order to make things work.
> >
> > Then perhaps they're actually dependencies? Did you f
Marc Wilson wrote:
> Neal Lippman wrote:
> > I did in install last pm of a package which "recommends" other packages,
> > which it turned out I needed in order to make things work.
>
> Then perhaps they're actually dependencies? Did you file a bug?
For discussion purposes what package are you ta
On Sun, Aug 31, 2003 at 01:11:24PM -0400, Neal Lippman wrote:
> I was wondering if someone could clarify how apt-get handles the various
> categories of related packages.
It doesn't. The only thing apt-get cares about is dependencies.
> I did in install last pm of a package which "recommends" ot
On Sun, 2003-08-31 at 13:11, Neal Lippman wrote:
> I was wondering if someone could clarify how apt-get handles the various
> categories of related packages.
>
> I did in install last pm of a package which "recommends" other packages,
> which it turned out I needed in order to make things work. Ho
Hi,
Neal Lippman wrote:
> I did in install last pm of a package which "recommends" other packages,
> which it turned out I needed in order to make things work. However,
Is that package needed to make a feature work or to make the whole
program actually work? In the latter case this should be a De
I was wondering if someone could clarify how apt-get handles the various
categories of related packages.
I did in install last pm of a package which "recommends" other packages,
which it turned out I needed in order to make things work. However,
apt-get install did not automagically install the r
6 matches
Mail list logo
