What's with APT dependency checking? Mozilla showed up for me (I've listed experimental components) as an upgrade candidate -- but APT claims that to install this latest Mozilla version, 14 existing packages (including gnome) will have to be removed. My point is that I already have the previous version of Mozilla installed -- and it appears to co-exist quite well with all those packages. It seems far-fetched to me that ALL of those packages depend upon Mozilla executables, and that they will ALL be broken if I were to install this latest Mozilla version. Grrr, mikus (linux newbie, more or less) p.s. On another platform (not Linux) I am able to launch Mozilla IN ITS OWN SESSION in such a way that Mozilla does not share any executable modules with any other application/version. Does Linux truly require __global__ sharing of executables, such that installing a new Mozilla can obsolete GNOME ?
On Saturday 19 June 2004 08:04, Mikus Grinbergs wrote:
What's with APT dependency checking? Mozilla showed up for me (I've listed experimental components) as an upgrade candidate -- but APT claims that to install this latest Mozilla version, 14 existing packages (including gnome) will have to be removed.
My point is that I already have the previous version of Mozilla installed -- and it appears to co-exist quite well with all those packages. It seems far-fetched to me that ALL of those packages depend upon Mozilla executables, and that they will ALL be broken if I were to install this latest Mozilla version.
Grrr, mikus (linux newbie, more or less)
p.s. On another platform (not Linux) I am able to launch Mozilla IN ITS OWN SESSION in such a way that Mozilla does not share any executable modules with any other application/version.
Does Linux truly require __global__ sharing of executables, such that installing a new Mozilla can obsolete GNOME ?
I ran into this same thing just this past week. YaST says one thing, APT says something else --though close to what YaST states about the deps. The one *major* difference is that APT told me that k3b had to be eradicated & it didn't say so until the rest of the pkgs had already been d/l & were being installed. APT said [BTW] I need to remove k3b! Uh-oh... The upshot was a broken system. Konqueror, kget, YaST, et.al. all broke. -- ...CH SuSE 9 Works Linux user# 313696 Linux box# 199365
On Saturday 19 June 2004 08:04, Mikus Grinbergs wrote: <SNIP>
Grrr, mikus (linux newbie, more or less)
p.s. On another platform (not Linux) I am able to launch Mozilla IN ITS OWN SESSION in such a way that Mozilla does not share any executable modules with any other application/version.
Does Linux truly require __global__ sharing of executables, such that installing a new Mozilla can obsolete GNOME ?
Forgot to mention... I now use YaST for any major updating & use APT just for installing apps from Packman's site (or those not in SuSE's arsenal). So far, so good. -- ...CH SuSE 9 Works Linux user# 313696 Linux box# 199365
Op zaterdag 19 juni 2004 15:04, schreef Mikus Grinbergs:
What's with APT dependency checking? Mozilla showed up for me (I've listed experimental components) as an upgrade candidate -- but APT claims that to install this latest Mozilla version, 14 existing packages (including gnome) will have to be removed.
It claims that according in the information in the rpm packages. Considering this as a packaging bug. Which suse version?
My point is that I already have the previous version of Mozilla installed -- and it appears to co-exist quite well with all those packages. It seems far-fetched to me that ALL of those packages depend upon Mozilla executables, and that they will ALL be broken if I were to install this latest Mozilla version.
Which pkgs are to be removed?
Grrr, mikus (linux newbie, more or less)
I have no problems installing mozilla-1.7 on a standard suse system (kept up to date solely with apt): linux:~ # apt -s install mozilla Reading Package Lists... Done Building Dependency Tree... Done The following packages will be upgraded mozilla The following packages will be REMOVED: epiphany epiphany-plugins 1 upgraded, 0 newly installed, 2 removed and 17 not upgraded. Remv epiphany (1.0.7-64 suse:9.1/stable, SuSE:9.1/stable) Remv epiphany-plugins (0.1.2-225 suse:9.1/stable, SuSE:9.1/stable) -- Richard Bos Without a home the journey is endless
On Sun, 20 Jun 2004 00:01:24 +0200 Richard Bos
Op zaterdag 19 juni 2004 15:04, schreef Mikus Grinbergs:
What's with APT dependency checking? Mozilla showed up for me (I've listed experimental components) as an upgrade candidate -- but APT claims that to install this latest Mozilla version, 14 existing packages (including gnome) will have to be removed.
It claims that according in the information in the rpm packages. Considering this as a packaging bug.
Judging by what I saw after I had posted, this could have been my fault -- in playing around with various component names in sources.list, I may have caused some packages to be installed which APT later identified as incompatible with Mozilla. Having decided that what I wanted was a small APT dependency conflict list, I went ahead with the Mozilla 1.7 install (which removed those 14 conflicting packages). I then reloaded most of the removed packages from my 9.1 CDs (YaST did not complain); some of the remaining removed packages were "magically" picked up by an APT dist-upgrade (APT did not complain). [NOTE: my install of Mozilla 1.7 caused the removal of Epiphany and Galeon (both of which EXPLICITLY want Mozilla 1.6) - this has affected what I can do in Gnome. Methinks browser developers are not talking to each other.] In my mind, dependency conflicts should behave "symmetrically". But to me it appears that APT was more paranoid than YaST. Whenever Mozilla 1.6 got installed on my system, and whenever those other 14 packages got installed, there were *no* warning messages. Yet, after receiving the warning from my attempted 1.7 install about 14 packages needing to be removed, I tried telling APT I wanted a "reinstall" of 1.6 -- and APT responded with the __same__ warning about needing to remove those same 14 packages !!
Which suse version?
9.1 (see the 'Subject:' line)
I have no problems installing mozilla-1.7 on a standard suse system (kept up to date solely with apt):
linux:~ # apt -s install mozilla Reading Package Lists... Done Building Dependency Tree... Done The following packages will be upgraded mozilla The following packages will be REMOVED: epiphany epiphany-plugins 1 upgraded, 0 newly installed, 2 removed and 17 not upgraded. Remv epiphany (1.0.7-64 suse:9.1/stable, SuSE:9.1/stable) Remv epiphany-plugins (0.1.2-225 suse:9.1/stable, SuSE:9.1/stable)
You too had Epiphany being removed. And my standard SuSE system still shows an icon for Epiphany in the default Gnome taskbar !! mikus
Op maandag 21 juni 2004 06:59, schreef Mikus Grinbergs:
In my mind, dependency conflicts should behave "symmetrically". But to me it appears that APT was more paranoid than YaST. Whenever Mozilla 1.6 got installed on my system, and whenever those other 14 packages got installed, there were *no* warning messages. Yet, after receiving the warning from my attempted 1.7 install about 14 packages needing to be removed, I tried telling APT I wanted a "reinstall" of 1.6 -- and APT responded with the __same__ warning about needing to remove those same 14 packages !!
Apt is just strict, while Yast is more forgiven. By being more strict apt forces the package builder/provide to be more secure/precise, which may result in the end in an easier package installation and a smooth running system. It's all about keeping the rpmdb database in a consistent state.
Which suse version?
9.1 (see the 'Subject:' line)
Ah, I didn't look at that.
I have no problems installing mozilla-1.7 on a standard suse system (kept up to date solely with apt):
linux:~ # apt -s install mozilla Reading Package Lists... Done Building Dependency Tree... Done The following packages will be upgraded mozilla The following packages will be REMOVED: epiphany epiphany-plugins 1 upgraded, 0 newly installed, 2 removed and 17 not upgraded. Remv epiphany (1.0.7-64 suse:9.1/stable, SuSE:9.1/stable) Remv epiphany-plugins (0.1.2-225 suse:9.1/stable, SuSE:9.1/stable)
You too had Epiphany being removed. And my standard SuSE system still shows an icon for Epiphany in the default Gnome taskbar !!
I use kde, so I didn't (don't) see the side effect on the gnome desktop. -- Richard Bos Without a home the journey is endless
participants (3)
-
C Hamel -
mikus＠bga.com -
Richard Bos