On Sun, May 08, 2005 at 01:28:58AM +0200, Daniel Déchelotte wrote:
[...]
> I think that an history-independent behaviour makes senses for
> meta-packages. Let's imagine a "prerm" script for package kde. On running
> "apt-get remove kde", the user would see this warning:
>
> ,--
Jon Dowland a écrit :
| aptitude does what you want by marking which packages were
| automatically installed, so if you had done
|
| $ aptitude install kde
| $ aptitude remove kde
|
| The desired result would be achieved.
You are right, but consider a more realistic situation, such as "install
On 5/8/05, Daniel Déchelotte <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Here is the baseline: while "apt-get install kde" installs KDE, "apt-get
> remove kde" does not remove anything. Power users know this, but it can be
> disconcerting for novices, and every user could benefit from a way to say
> "
Daniel Déchelotte wrote:
> > Here is the baseline: while "apt-get install kde" installs KDE, "apt-get
> > remove kde" does not remove anything. [...]
> > Is there anyone else "worried" by this issue?
Kamaraju Kusumanchi wrote:
> If you have not included the last line, I probably would not have
The non-automatic thus potentially difficult question is "what is part of
KDE?" Surely kdelibs. What about Qt? And libc6? (just to name three of
KDE's dependencies and to show that the answer is *not* fully deducible
from the dependency graph). So the maintainer will have to take some
subjective de
5 matches
Mail list logo
