apt ignores virtual package provided equivs-created package












0














I want to install pdftk on my development machine where I have installed (multiple versions of) Java with SDKMAN!. In order to fulfill the dependency on default-jre-headless of pdftk-java, I created a simple file for equivs-build:



Section: misc

Priority: optional

Homepage: https://github.com/reitzig/sdkman-equivs

Standards-Version: 3.9.2



Package: sdkman-java-11-open

Maintainer: Raphael Reitzig <4246780+reitzig@users.noreply.github.com>

Provides: openjdk-11-jre-headless, openjdk-11-jdk-headless, openjdk-11-source, default-jdk-headless, default-jre-headless

Conflicts: openjdk-11-jre-headless, openjdk-11-jdk-headless, openjdk-11-source

Replaces: openjdk-11-jre-headless, openjdk-11-jdk-headless, openjdk-11-source

Architecture: all

Description: Dummy package for OpenJDK 11 installed with SDKMAN!


I then installed the package with



equivs-build java-11-open

sudo dpkg -i sdkman-java-11-open_1.0_all.deb


Seems to have worked:



$ aptitude show default-jre-headless

Package: default-jre-headless            

<snip>

Provided by: sdkman-java-11-open (1.0)


However, the dependency is still not met:



$ sudo aptitude update > /dev/null; sudo aptitude install pdftk

The following NEW packages will be installed:

  default-jre-headless{a} java-common{a} libapache-pom-java{a} libbcprov-java{a} libcommons-lang3-java{a} 

  libcommons-parent-java{a} pdftk pdftk-java{a}


Same with apt-get. This is on Ubuntu 18.04.



What have I done wrong?






apt dpkg aptitude equivs







share|improve this question





























    0














    I want to install pdftk on my development machine where I have installed (multiple versions of) Java with SDKMAN!. In order to fulfill the dependency on default-jre-headless of pdftk-java, I created a simple file for equivs-build:



    Section: misc
    
Priority: optional
    
Homepage: https://github.com/reitzig/sdkman-equivs
    
Standards-Version: 3.9.2
    

    
Package: sdkman-java-11-open
    
Maintainer: Raphael Reitzig <4246780+reitzig@users.noreply.github.com>
    
Provides: openjdk-11-jre-headless, openjdk-11-jdk-headless, openjdk-11-source, default-jdk-headless, default-jre-headless
    
Conflicts: openjdk-11-jre-headless, openjdk-11-jdk-headless, openjdk-11-source
    
Replaces: openjdk-11-jre-headless, openjdk-11-jdk-headless, openjdk-11-source
    
Architecture: all
    
Description: Dummy package for OpenJDK 11 installed with SDKMAN!


    I then installed the package with



    equivs-build java-11-open
    
sudo dpkg -i sdkman-java-11-open_1.0_all.deb


    Seems to have worked:



    $ aptitude show default-jre-headless
    
Package: default-jre-headless            
    
<snip>
    
Provided by: sdkman-java-11-open (1.0)


    However, the dependency is still not met:



    $ sudo aptitude update > /dev/null; sudo aptitude install pdftk
    
The following NEW packages will be installed:
    
  default-jre-headless{a} java-common{a} libapache-pom-java{a} libbcprov-java{a} libcommons-lang3-java{a} 
    
  libcommons-parent-java{a} pdftk pdftk-java{a}


    Same with apt-get. This is on Ubuntu 18.04.



    What have I done wrong?






    apt dpkg aptitude equivs







    share|improve this question



























      0












      0








      0







      I want to install pdftk on my development machine where I have installed (multiple versions of) Java with SDKMAN!. In order to fulfill the dependency on default-jre-headless of pdftk-java, I created a simple file for equivs-build:



      Section: misc
      
Priority: optional
      
Homepage: https://github.com/reitzig/sdkman-equivs
      
Standards-Version: 3.9.2
      

      
Package: sdkman-java-11-open
      
Maintainer: Raphael Reitzig <4246780+reitzig@users.noreply.github.com>
      
Provides: openjdk-11-jre-headless, openjdk-11-jdk-headless, openjdk-11-source, default-jdk-headless, default-jre-headless
      
Conflicts: openjdk-11-jre-headless, openjdk-11-jdk-headless, openjdk-11-source
      
Replaces: openjdk-11-jre-headless, openjdk-11-jdk-headless, openjdk-11-source
      
Architecture: all
      
Description: Dummy package for OpenJDK 11 installed with SDKMAN!


      I then installed the package with



      equivs-build java-11-open
      
sudo dpkg -i sdkman-java-11-open_1.0_all.deb


      Seems to have worked:



      $ aptitude show default-jre-headless
      
Package: default-jre-headless            
      
<snip>
      
Provided by: sdkman-java-11-open (1.0)


      However, the dependency is still not met:



      $ sudo aptitude update > /dev/null; sudo aptitude install pdftk
      
The following NEW packages will be installed:
      
  default-jre-headless{a} java-common{a} libapache-pom-java{a} libbcprov-java{a} libcommons-lang3-java{a} 
      
  libcommons-parent-java{a} pdftk pdftk-java{a}


      Same with apt-get. This is on Ubuntu 18.04.



      What have I done wrong?






      apt dpkg aptitude equivs







      share|improve this question















      I want to install pdftk on my development machine where I have installed (multiple versions of) Java with SDKMAN!. In order to fulfill the dependency on default-jre-headless of pdftk-java, I created a simple file for equivs-build:



      Section: misc
      
Priority: optional
      
Homepage: https://github.com/reitzig/sdkman-equivs
      
Standards-Version: 3.9.2
      

      
Package: sdkman-java-11-open
      
Maintainer: Raphael Reitzig <4246780+reitzig@users.noreply.github.com>
      
Provides: openjdk-11-jre-headless, openjdk-11-jdk-headless, openjdk-11-source, default-jdk-headless, default-jre-headless
      
Conflicts: openjdk-11-jre-headless, openjdk-11-jdk-headless, openjdk-11-source
      
Replaces: openjdk-11-jre-headless, openjdk-11-jdk-headless, openjdk-11-source
      
Architecture: all
      
Description: Dummy package for OpenJDK 11 installed with SDKMAN!


      I then installed the package with



      equivs-build java-11-open
      
sudo dpkg -i sdkman-java-11-open_1.0_all.deb


      Seems to have worked:



      $ aptitude show default-jre-headless
      
Package: default-jre-headless            
      
<snip>
      
Provided by: sdkman-java-11-open (1.0)


      However, the dependency is still not met:



      $ sudo aptitude update > /dev/null; sudo aptitude install pdftk
      
The following NEW packages will be installed:
      
  default-jre-headless{a} java-common{a} libapache-pom-java{a} libbcprov-java{a} libcommons-lang3-java{a} 
      
  libcommons-parent-java{a} pdftk pdftk-java{a}


      Same with apt-get. This is on Ubuntu 18.04.



      What have I done wrong?






      apt dpkg aptitude equivs




      apt dpkg aptitude equivs






      share|improve this question















      share|improve this question













      share|improve this question




      share|improve this question








      edited yesterday

























      asked yesterday









      Raphael

      820920




      820920






















          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes


















          1














          David Foerster’s pdftk-java package depends on default-jre-headless (>= 7) | java7-runtime-headless; to satisfy that, you need a package with a versioned “Provides” (for default-jre-headless), or a package providing java7-runtime-headless. (I think the versioned dependency on default-jre-headless is incorrect; the default JDK/JRE packages are concrete packages with an epoch, so they all match that, and they’re not supposed to be used to enforce minimal versions.)



          You should change your equivs file to provide the same virtual packages as the packages you’re replacing (openjdk-11-jre-headless etc.), with at least:



          Provides: java-runtime-headless, java10-runtime-headless, java11-runtime-headless, java2-runtime-headless, java5-runtime-headless, java6-runtime-headless, java7-runtime-headless, java8-runtime-headless, java9-runtime-headless, openjdk-11-jre-headless, openjdk-11-jdk-headless, openjdk-11-source, default-jdk-headless, default-jre-headless


          (You probably don’t need to provide the concrete openjdk-11-jre-headless and openjdk-11-jdk-headless packages, but I’ve left them in for simplicity.)






          share|improve this answer





















          • I saw this long list of provided packages, which doesn't make a lot of sense to me: a Java 11 runtime does not double as a Java 7 runtime! But it seems it has to be this way (for now). Thanks!
            – Raphael
            yesterday










          • I agree on the dependency. default-jre-headless has version 2:1.10-... in the repos; >= 7 seems inconsistent. It should probably be java7-runtime-headless | java8-runtime-headless | java9-runtime-headless | java10-runtime-headless | java11-runtime-headless. At least, that seems to be the intent.
            – Raphael
            yesterday










          • More to the point: since openjdk-11-jre-headless provides all the java_0runtime-headless, I thought providing the single, specific package would to the trick. Are provides not recursive?
            – Raphael
            yesterday






          • 1




            No, provides aren’t transitive.
            – Stephen Kitt
            yesterday








          • 1




            To clarify this further, “Provides” is intended (at its core) for virtual packages, so there’s nothing to anchor transitive dependencies on.
            – Stephen Kitt
            yesterday











          Your Answer








          StackExchange.ready(function() {
          var channelOptions = {
          tags: "".split(" "),
          id: "106"
          };
          initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

          StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
          // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
          if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
          StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
          createEditor();
          });
          }
          else {
          createEditor();
          }
          });

          function createEditor() {
          StackExchange.prepareEditor({
          heartbeatType: 'answer',
          autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
          convertImagesToLinks: false,
          noModals: true,
          showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
          reputationToPostImages: null,
          bindNavPrevention: true,
          postfix: "",
          imageUploader: {
          brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
          contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
          allowUrls: true
          },
          onDemand: true,
          discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
          ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
          });


          }
          });














          draft saved

          draft discarded


















          StackExchange.ready(
          function () {
          StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2funix.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f492446%2fapt-ignores-virtual-package-provided-equivs-created-package%23new-answer', 'question_page');
          }
          );

          Post as a guest















          Required, but never shown

























          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes








          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes









          active

          oldest

          votes






          active

          oldest

          votes









          1














          David Foerster’s pdftk-java package depends on default-jre-headless (>= 7) | java7-runtime-headless; to satisfy that, you need a package with a versioned “Provides” (for default-jre-headless), or a package providing java7-runtime-headless. (I think the versioned dependency on default-jre-headless is incorrect; the default JDK/JRE packages are concrete packages with an epoch, so they all match that, and they’re not supposed to be used to enforce minimal versions.)



          You should change your equivs file to provide the same virtual packages as the packages you’re replacing (openjdk-11-jre-headless etc.), with at least:



          Provides: java-runtime-headless, java10-runtime-headless, java11-runtime-headless, java2-runtime-headless, java5-runtime-headless, java6-runtime-headless, java7-runtime-headless, java8-runtime-headless, java9-runtime-headless, openjdk-11-jre-headless, openjdk-11-jdk-headless, openjdk-11-source, default-jdk-headless, default-jre-headless


          (You probably don’t need to provide the concrete openjdk-11-jre-headless and openjdk-11-jdk-headless packages, but I’ve left them in for simplicity.)






          share|improve this answer





















          • I saw this long list of provided packages, which doesn't make a lot of sense to me: a Java 11 runtime does not double as a Java 7 runtime! But it seems it has to be this way (for now). Thanks!
            – Raphael
            yesterday










          • I agree on the dependency. default-jre-headless has version 2:1.10-... in the repos; >= 7 seems inconsistent. It should probably be java7-runtime-headless | java8-runtime-headless | java9-runtime-headless | java10-runtime-headless | java11-runtime-headless. At least, that seems to be the intent.
            – Raphael
            yesterday










          • More to the point: since openjdk-11-jre-headless provides all the java_0runtime-headless, I thought providing the single, specific package would to the trick. Are provides not recursive?
            – Raphael
            yesterday






          • 1




            No, provides aren’t transitive.
            – Stephen Kitt
            yesterday








          • 1




            To clarify this further, “Provides” is intended (at its core) for virtual packages, so there’s nothing to anchor transitive dependencies on.
            – Stephen Kitt
            yesterday
















          1














          David Foerster’s pdftk-java package depends on default-jre-headless (>= 7) | java7-runtime-headless; to satisfy that, you need a package with a versioned “Provides” (for default-jre-headless), or a package providing java7-runtime-headless. (I think the versioned dependency on default-jre-headless is incorrect; the default JDK/JRE packages are concrete packages with an epoch, so they all match that, and they’re not supposed to be used to enforce minimal versions.)



          You should change your equivs file to provide the same virtual packages as the packages you’re replacing (openjdk-11-jre-headless etc.), with at least:



          Provides: java-runtime-headless, java10-runtime-headless, java11-runtime-headless, java2-runtime-headless, java5-runtime-headless, java6-runtime-headless, java7-runtime-headless, java8-runtime-headless, java9-runtime-headless, openjdk-11-jre-headless, openjdk-11-jdk-headless, openjdk-11-source, default-jdk-headless, default-jre-headless


          (You probably don’t need to provide the concrete openjdk-11-jre-headless and openjdk-11-jdk-headless packages, but I’ve left them in for simplicity.)






          share|improve this answer





















          • I saw this long list of provided packages, which doesn't make a lot of sense to me: a Java 11 runtime does not double as a Java 7 runtime! But it seems it has to be this way (for now). Thanks!
            – Raphael
            yesterday










          • I agree on the dependency. default-jre-headless has version 2:1.10-... in the repos; >= 7 seems inconsistent. It should probably be java7-runtime-headless | java8-runtime-headless | java9-runtime-headless | java10-runtime-headless | java11-runtime-headless. At least, that seems to be the intent.
            – Raphael
            yesterday










          • More to the point: since openjdk-11-jre-headless provides all the java_0runtime-headless, I thought providing the single, specific package would to the trick. Are provides not recursive?
            – Raphael
            yesterday






          • 1




            No, provides aren’t transitive.
            – Stephen Kitt
            yesterday








          • 1




            To clarify this further, “Provides” is intended (at its core) for virtual packages, so there’s nothing to anchor transitive dependencies on.
            – Stephen Kitt
            yesterday














          1












          1








          1






          David Foerster’s pdftk-java package depends on default-jre-headless (>= 7) | java7-runtime-headless; to satisfy that, you need a package with a versioned “Provides” (for default-jre-headless), or a package providing java7-runtime-headless. (I think the versioned dependency on default-jre-headless is incorrect; the default JDK/JRE packages are concrete packages with an epoch, so they all match that, and they’re not supposed to be used to enforce minimal versions.)



          You should change your equivs file to provide the same virtual packages as the packages you’re replacing (openjdk-11-jre-headless etc.), with at least:



          Provides: java-runtime-headless, java10-runtime-headless, java11-runtime-headless, java2-runtime-headless, java5-runtime-headless, java6-runtime-headless, java7-runtime-headless, java8-runtime-headless, java9-runtime-headless, openjdk-11-jre-headless, openjdk-11-jdk-headless, openjdk-11-source, default-jdk-headless, default-jre-headless


          (You probably don’t need to provide the concrete openjdk-11-jre-headless and openjdk-11-jdk-headless packages, but I’ve left them in for simplicity.)






          share|improve this answer












          David Foerster’s pdftk-java package depends on default-jre-headless (>= 7) | java7-runtime-headless; to satisfy that, you need a package with a versioned “Provides” (for default-jre-headless), or a package providing java7-runtime-headless. (I think the versioned dependency on default-jre-headless is incorrect; the default JDK/JRE packages are concrete packages with an epoch, so they all match that, and they’re not supposed to be used to enforce minimal versions.)



          You should change your equivs file to provide the same virtual packages as the packages you’re replacing (openjdk-11-jre-headless etc.), with at least:



          Provides: java-runtime-headless, java10-runtime-headless, java11-runtime-headless, java2-runtime-headless, java5-runtime-headless, java6-runtime-headless, java7-runtime-headless, java8-runtime-headless, java9-runtime-headless, openjdk-11-jre-headless, openjdk-11-jdk-headless, openjdk-11-source, default-jdk-headless, default-jre-headless


          (You probably don’t need to provide the concrete openjdk-11-jre-headless and openjdk-11-jdk-headless packages, but I’ve left them in for simplicity.)







          share|improve this answer












          share|improve this answer



          share|improve this answer










          answered yesterday









          Stephen Kitt

          165k24366445




          165k24366445












          • I saw this long list of provided packages, which doesn't make a lot of sense to me: a Java 11 runtime does not double as a Java 7 runtime! But it seems it has to be this way (for now). Thanks!
            – Raphael
            yesterday










          • I agree on the dependency. default-jre-headless has version 2:1.10-... in the repos; >= 7 seems inconsistent. It should probably be java7-runtime-headless | java8-runtime-headless | java9-runtime-headless | java10-runtime-headless | java11-runtime-headless. At least, that seems to be the intent.
            – Raphael
            yesterday










          • More to the point: since openjdk-11-jre-headless provides all the java_0runtime-headless, I thought providing the single, specific package would to the trick. Are provides not recursive?
            – Raphael
            yesterday






          • 1




            No, provides aren’t transitive.
            – Stephen Kitt
            yesterday








          • 1




            To clarify this further, “Provides” is intended (at its core) for virtual packages, so there’s nothing to anchor transitive dependencies on.
            – Stephen Kitt
            yesterday


















          • I saw this long list of provided packages, which doesn't make a lot of sense to me: a Java 11 runtime does not double as a Java 7 runtime! But it seems it has to be this way (for now). Thanks!
            – Raphael
            yesterday










          • I agree on the dependency. default-jre-headless has version 2:1.10-... in the repos; >= 7 seems inconsistent. It should probably be java7-runtime-headless | java8-runtime-headless | java9-runtime-headless | java10-runtime-headless | java11-runtime-headless. At least, that seems to be the intent.
            – Raphael
            yesterday










          • More to the point: since openjdk-11-jre-headless provides all the java_0runtime-headless, I thought providing the single, specific package would to the trick. Are provides not recursive?
            – Raphael
            yesterday






          • 1




            No, provides aren’t transitive.
            – Stephen Kitt
            yesterday








          • 1




            To clarify this further, “Provides” is intended (at its core) for virtual packages, so there’s nothing to anchor transitive dependencies on.
            – Stephen Kitt
            yesterday
















          I saw this long list of provided packages, which doesn't make a lot of sense to me: a Java 11 runtime does not double as a Java 7 runtime! But it seems it has to be this way (for now). Thanks!
          – Raphael
          yesterday




          I saw this long list of provided packages, which doesn't make a lot of sense to me: a Java 11 runtime does not double as a Java 7 runtime! But it seems it has to be this way (for now). Thanks!
          – Raphael
          yesterday












          I agree on the dependency. default-jre-headless has version 2:1.10-... in the repos; >= 7 seems inconsistent. It should probably be java7-runtime-headless | java8-runtime-headless | java9-runtime-headless | java10-runtime-headless | java11-runtime-headless. At least, that seems to be the intent.
          – Raphael
          yesterday




          I agree on the dependency. default-jre-headless has version 2:1.10-... in the repos; >= 7 seems inconsistent. It should probably be java7-runtime-headless | java8-runtime-headless | java9-runtime-headless | java10-runtime-headless | java11-runtime-headless. At least, that seems to be the intent.
          – Raphael
          yesterday












          More to the point: since openjdk-11-jre-headless provides all the java_0runtime-headless, I thought providing the single, specific package would to the trick. Are provides not recursive?
          – Raphael
          yesterday




          More to the point: since openjdk-11-jre-headless provides all the java_0runtime-headless, I thought providing the single, specific package would to the trick. Are provides not recursive?
          – Raphael
          yesterday




          1




          1




          No, provides aren’t transitive.
          – Stephen Kitt
          yesterday






          No, provides aren’t transitive.
          – Stephen Kitt
          yesterday






          1




          1




          To clarify this further, “Provides” is intended (at its core) for virtual packages, so there’s nothing to anchor transitive dependencies on.
          – Stephen Kitt
          yesterday




          To clarify this further, “Provides” is intended (at its core) for virtual packages, so there’s nothing to anchor transitive dependencies on.
          – Stephen Kitt
          yesterday


















          draft saved

          draft discarded




















































          Thanks for contributing an answer to Unix & Linux Stack Exchange!


          • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

          But avoid …



          • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

          • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


          To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.





          Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.


          Please pay close attention to the following guidance:


          • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

          But avoid …



          • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

          • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


          To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




          draft saved


          draft discarded














          StackExchange.ready(
          function () {
          StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2funix.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f492446%2fapt-ignores-virtual-package-provided-equivs-created-package%23new-answer', 'question_page');
          }
          );

          Post as a guest















          Required, but never shown





















































          Required, but never shown














          Required, but never shown












          Required, but never shown







          Required, but never shown

































          Required, but never shown














          Required, but never shown












          Required, but never shown







          Required, but never shown







          -

          Popular posts from this blog

          How to make a Squid Proxy server?

          Image
          1 I want to set up squid proxy server for monitoring user activity in a network and Internet Web URL filtering for user. I also want to configure the user login, user log, user access group, and block unwanted web sites in my network. Please help me and guide me the full process to do this. server proxy squid share | improve this question edited Jul 31 '12 at 14:45 Jorge Castro 37.1k 107 422 617 asked Jul 31 '12 at 5:16 Goivind Tiwari Goivind Tiwari ...
          Read more

          Is this a new Fibonacci Identity?

          Image
          6 1 $begingroup$ I have found the following Fibonacci Identity (and proved it). If $F_n$ denotes the nth Fibonacci Number, we have the following identity begin{equation} F_{n-r+h}F_{n+k+g+1} - F_{n-r+g}F_{n+k+h+1} = (-1)^{n+r+h+1} F_{g-h}F_{k+r+1} end{equation} where $F_1 = F_2 = 1$ , $r leq n$ , $h leq g$ , and $n, g, k in mathbb{N}$ . It is not too hard to show that this identity subsumes Cassini's Identity, Catalan's Identity, Vajda's Idenity, and d'Ocagne's identity to name a few. I have done a pretty thorough literature review, and I have not found anything like this, but I am still wondering if anyone has seen this identity before? I found this by accident after noticing some patterns in some analysis work I was doing, so if this is already known I would be curious to see w...
          Read more

          19世紀

          Image
          この記事は検証可能な参考文献や出典が全く示されていないか、不十分です。 出典を追加して記事の信頼性向上にご協力ください。 （ 2012年3月 ） 千年紀: 2千年紀 世紀: 18世紀 - 19世紀 - 20世紀 十年紀: 1800年代 1810年代 1820年代 1830年代 1840年代 1850年代 1860年代 1870年代 1880年代 1890年代 19世紀に君臨した大英帝国。 19世紀 （じゅうきゅうせいき）は、西暦1801年から西暦1900年までの100年間を指す世紀。 目次 1 19世紀の歴史 1.1 国民国家の成立 1.2 帝国主義の興隆 1.3 列強の植民地争奪戦 2 できごと 2.1 1800年代 2.2 1810年代 2.3 1820年代 2.4 1830年代 2.5 1840年代 2.6 1850年代 2.7 1860年代 2.8 1870年代 2.9 1880年代 2.10 1890年代 2.11 1900年代 3 文化 3.1 文学 3.2 音楽 3.3 思想 3.4 科学 3.5 技術 4 人物 4.1 ヨーロッパ 4.1.1 政治家・王族 4.1.1.1 フランス 4.1.1.2 オーストリア＝ハンガリー 4.1.1.3 ロシア 4.1.1.4 イギリス 4.1.1.5 ドイツ（プロイセンほかドイツ領邦を含む） 4.1.1.6 北欧 4.1.1.7 イタリア 4.1.1.8 スペイン 4.1.1.9 ベルギー 4.1.1.10 ギリシア 4.1.2 軍人 4.1.3 実業家 4.1.4 科学と技術 4.1.5 思想と哲学・人文諸学 4.1.6 宗教 4.1.7 文学 4.1.8 美術 4.1.9 音楽 4.1.10 社会事業家 4.1.11 探検家・旅行家 4.1.12 料...
          Read more