|
|
|
|
|
|
| Author |
Message |
Eddy
*nix forums beginner
Joined: 04 May 2005
Posts: 16
|
 Posted: Sat Feb 05, 2005 11:50 pm Post subject:
Re: aptitude vs. apt-get
|
|
|
Mel Andres a écrit le 05/02/05 20:20 :
| Quote: | Eddy wrote:
snip ----
Now for those who might still be reading this (how boring it must be !
I'm sorry.) let's get this clear : even though I do not like aptitude,
I'm not saying anything bad about it. I am glad it exists, providing
additionnal possibilities to what apt-get offers. There is even one I
wish I could have using apt-get : a log file.
What if you ran "script filename" prior to running apt?
Mel
(Who still in the process of moving to debian.)
Never thought of that. I will give it a try next time. |
Thanks.
--
Eddy
"La notion de passoire est indépendante de la notion de trou."
Les Shadoks
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Steve Lamb
*nix forums Guru
Joined: 25 Feb 2005
Posts: 601
|
| Posted: Sat Feb 05, 2005 6:50 pm Post subject:
Re: aptitude vs. apt-get
|
|
|
Eddy wrote:
| Quote: | What is ? I'm just stating a fact.
|
No, you're misinterpreting those facts.
| Quote: | As I said before, I understand *why* aptitude gives it but that doesn't
change the fact that it is incorrect.
|
No, it isn't incorrect. The error it gives is accurate for the infomation
*IT HAS*. The information is wrong, not the error. You don't like the error
that's your problem. You know how to fix the error.
| Quote: | I never said I had a problem dealing with that situation. You pretended
that aptitude was self explanatory and I gave you an example showing it
is not. That you and I know how to react has nothing to do with it.
|
I found it self explanitory when it happened to me. Oh, it is marked
managed, it thinks it is unused, marked it manually installed, done. Your
problem, not aptitudes. That's like saying that something that logs to syslog
"doesn't explain why it fails to start" because you don't want to look in syslog.
| Quote: | Normally I would thank you for telling me what to do (even though I knew
it before but you couldn't know that). Unfortunately your pebkac gives a
condescending ring to it all. Maybe you didn't mean it; I'm sorry that's
how I resent it.
|
Because you, and Ron before you, are spreading BS. You're saying aptitude
doesn't do something it does. Don't like PEBKAC, don't be the problem.
| Quote: | It will remove libgnutls11-dev because it has 4 missing dependencies.
Well apt-get installing those show that they are installed with the
latest versions; apt-get install libgnutls11-dev tells the same.
Are you sure?
Definitely.
|
Apprently not. check again.
| Quote: | But this proves my point again.
A package is installed or it is not.
Your providing a reason for aptitude not seeing it doesn't change the
fact that the info provided by aptitude is incorrect.
|
The information provided by aptitude is indeed correct. You problem is
that you think "Gee, I have an Open Office spreadsheet, why doesn't Excel see
it?" Your problem, not aptitudes.
| Quote: | I *know* that. You said aptitude displayed informative messages.
In this case I just stated that it didn't display anything more then
"these packages will be installed".
|
Yeah, and? You want to know it is a keypress away. Again, /you are the
problem/. Just because a program doesn't spoonfeed you the information
doesn't mean it the information isn't there. You want spoon-fed, go back to
Word with Clippy.
| Quote: | Did you read the end of my previous message ?
|
Yes. Did you try to understand mine? Apparently not.
| Quote: | I have read the doc !
|
Well then, you're just being intentionally obtuse.
| Quote: | In your previous message you said "Since aptitude does tell you exactly
why it is removing packages if the user cannot take in that information
it is PEBKAC. "
Here you say that by reading the aptitude help one can understand.
It is not the same!
|
Yes it is. It is like saying that vim is a lousy editor because you can't
edit anything. Whereas anyone who has read the basic help for vim would know
how to get into and out of insert mode. IE, and this is the point you sail
right past so pardon me making it quite blunt, *READING THE BASIC HELP IS THE
FIRST STEP A USER /MUST/ TAKE BEFORE BITCHING ABOUT THE PROGRAM. IF SAID USER
HASN'T READ THE HELP THEN THEY...ARE...THE...PROBLEM.* Clear?
--
Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your
PGP Key: 8B6E99C5 | main connection to the switchboard of souls.
-------------------------------+--------------------------------------------- |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Eddy
*nix forums beginner
Joined: 04 May 2005
Posts: 16
|
| Posted: Sat Feb 05, 2005 6:20 pm Post subject:
Re: aptitude vs. apt-get
|
|
|
Jason Bleazard a écrit le 05/02/05 03:00 :
| Quote: | On February 4, 2005 07:39 pm, Eddy wrote:
I start aptitude and type "g" to see what it plans to do.
It wants to remove vim as an "unused" package. As far as unused packages
go, I use this one everyday. Well let's read further... "It was
installed automatically". Well that's a lie : I installed it on pupose
but I didn't do it with aptitude. I can accept this kind of behaviour
but I will certainly not consider the message displayed as correct.
It sounds like you've already decided against aptitude, but for anyone else
reading this thread...
|
Yes and no.
I don't think I will use it in the near future but that doesn't mean
I've got anything against aptitude per se.
The fact that one doesn't like a program doesn't mean anything bad about
the prog itself.
| Quote: | You can fix this flag manually by pressing 'm'.
In my experience, aptitude always has a reason for whatever weird things it
might want to do. I might not agree with the reason, but at least I can find
it.
|
Exactly.
| Quote: | I personally like aptitude, because it helps keep the cruft off my system.
But I find that I do have to keep an eye on it.
Jason
|
--
Eddy
"La notion de passoire est indépendante de la notion de trou."
Les Shadoks
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mel Andres
*nix forums beginner
Joined: 05 Feb 2005
Posts: 1
|
| Posted: Sat Feb 05, 2005 6:20 pm Post subject:
Re: aptitude vs. apt-get
|
|
|
Eddy wrote:
| Quote: | Now for those who might still be reading this (how boring it must be !
I'm sorry.) let's get this clear : even though I do not like aptitude,
I'm not saying anything bad about it. I am glad it exists, providing
additionnal possibilities to what apt-get offers. There is even one I
wish I could have using apt-get : a log file.
|
What if you ran "script filename" prior to running apt?
Mel
(Who still in the process of moving to debian.) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Matthias Kaeppler
*nix forums Guru Wannabe
Joined: 14 Mar 2005
Posts: 249
|
| Posted: Sat Feb 05, 2005 6:10 pm Post subject:
Re: aptitude vs. apt-get
|
|
|
Steve Block wrote:
| Quote: | If you like using aptitude through the CLI, have you given wajig a try?
I tend to use it for all my command line work, then aptitude if I need
to browse by category, etc. Its worth taking a look at if you haven't
tried it yet.
|
Nope, haven't heard of it yet. Thanks for the tip, I'll give it a shot.
--
Regards,
Matthias
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Eddy
*nix forums beginner
Joined: 04 May 2005
Posts: 16
|
| Posted: Sat Feb 05, 2005 6:10 pm Post subject:
Re: aptitude vs. apt-get
|
|
|
Steve Block a écrit le 05/02/05 02:50 :
| Quote: | A lot of this sounds to me like aptitude's package cache is broken. You
could try moving /var/lib/apitude/pkgstates somewhere else and running it again
to see if that fixes anything.
|
You are right. All the problems disappear.
Thanks.
--
Eddy
"La notion de passoire est indépendante de la notion de trou."
Les Shadoks
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Eddy
*nix forums beginner
Joined: 04 May 2005
Posts: 16
|
| Posted: Sat Feb 05, 2005 6:00 pm Post subject:
Re: aptitude vs. apt-get
|
|
|
Steve Lamb a écrit le 05/02/05 04:30 :
| Quote: | Eddy wrote:
Steve Lamb a écrit le 04/02/05 23:50 :
The OP said he didn't like aptitude's behaviour.
Why do *you* have a problem with that ? You must have one though because
I can't see why you would start PEBKACking him otherwise.
Because he stated that it was for random reasons when the reasons are
clearly explained. That is just pure FUD because he has some irrational
dislike for aptitude and is spreading it here. Pardon me if I dislike
irrational FUD being spewed and respond accordingly.
|
I reread his message and I really can't agree.
He used the words "seemingly random" which to me doesn't mean that it is
random but that it can be perceived as such.
I'm not playing on words here Steve. So often can we see (on this list
and elsewhere) people who start bashing programs they don't like,
sometimes in a manner that is insulting towards the people who made,
contributed or maintained it. For once it wasn't the case. Just
someone stating his "irrational" dislike for it ? I still can't see
what's wrong with that. Of course you have the right not to like that
but do you have to be insulting ? (Some will disagree with that but as
far as I am concerned "pebkac" is an insult.)
| Quote: |
Seriously, I admit there probably is an explanation to the aptitude
behaviour.
Yup, chances are installing one of those two packages causes a dependancy
cascade which updates others to the point where they are no longer needed and
automatically removed.
I haven't got a problem with that but I just don't see why I
should bother trying to understand aptitude when apt-get does the job I
want.
That's fine. That is quite different than saying something completely BS
about aptitude.
As for your assertion that "aptitude does tell you exactly why it is
removing packages", well it simply is not true. At least not always. And
when it does it's not always correct.
(Again aptitude's doc probably provides explanations but don't pretend
that those informations are provided by aptitude itself.)
It is.
Example 1.
I start aptitude and type "g" to see what it plans to do.
It wants to remove vim as an "unused" package. As far as unused packages
go, I use this one everyday. Well let's read further... "It was
installed automatically". Well that's a lie : I installed it on pupose
but I didn't do it with aptitude. I can accept this kind of behaviour
but I will certainly not consider the message displayed as correct.
That's PEBKAC.
|
What is ? I'm just stating a fact.
Aptitude says vim is unused while I use it everyday.
Aptitude says vim was installed automatically while I installed it on
purpose. Therefore the information aptitude gives is wrong.
There is no argueing about that !
As I said before, I understand *why* aptitude gives it but that doesn't
change the fact that it is incorrect. We might say that by "unused"
aptitude means "was not installed by me and is not needed by any other
package" but I am sorry to tell you that acceptation of "unused" is not
in my dictionnary.
| Quote: | Simply mark it + and that goes away. Not all that hard.
In fact you can get rid of it by hitting + on the "installed software".
Personally I do that then M on the libraries.
|
I never said I had a problem dealing with that situation. You pretended
that aptitude was self explanatory and I gave you an example showing it
is not. That you and I know how to react has nothing to do with it.
Normally I would thank you for telling me what to do (even though I knew
it before but you couldn't know that). Unfortunately your pebkac gives a
condescending ring to it all. Maybe you didn't mean it; I'm sorry that's
how I resent it.
| Quote: | Example 2
It will remove libgnutls11-dev because it has 4 missing dependencies.
Well apt-get installing those show that they are installed with the
latest versions; apt-get install libgnutls11-dev tells the same.
Are you sure?
|
Definitely.
| Quote: | What does aptitude say when you trace the dependacies back?
You know, hit d, see what is missing, check to see what it has in its
database. You /are/ aware that apt-get and aptitude *do not use the same
database*, right?
|
Well not really. I knew aptitude needed its own database to deal with
unused or orphaned packages for instance but I did not realise this
could have an influence on the fact that a package is installed or not.
But this proves my point again.
A package is installed or it is not.
Your providing a reason for aptitude not seeing it doesn't change the
fact that the info provided by aptitude is incorrect.
| Quote: | Did you do an aptitude update first?
Example 3
It will install festival. Why ? It sure doesn't say and I really don't
need it. The same goes for a lot of other packages.
aptitude installs recommends.
|
I *know* that. You said aptitude displayed informative messages.
In this case I just stated that it didn't display anything more then
"these packages will be installed".
| Quote: | Hit r and it will tell you what is
dependant or recommending that package. Alternatively hit the options and
turn off install recommends.
|
Did you read the end of my previous message ?
| Quote: | For the record festival is recommended by
screader and education-music, do you have either of those installed?
I am not saying there is no reason to do it (and it is probably due to
the options regarding dependencies) but do not tell me that aptitude
gives the reason for its actions.
r to see what is dependant or recommending a package isn't telling you?
There's 2 possibilities here.
a: You're ignorant of that command which means you haven't read the help
aptitude provides. PEBKAC.
|
I have read the doc !
| Quote: | b: You're ignoring that command and how to use it. PEBKAC.
|
You *are* ignoring the end of my previous message. Is it on purpose ?
I don't see any reason to keep argueing with you on thoses terms.
I will read with interest your reply to this if you think one is needed
but I won't reply further because
1) we all know these kind of correspondance tends to become pointless
2) I have the feeling what you read is different from what I have written
3) basically, we agree on the most important (see below) and disagree on
wether the messages displayed by aptitude are any good : this is not
important
| Quote: |
Example 4
It wants to remove alsa, anacron and lots of other basic stuff and once
again does not provide any reason.
Did you hit d to see what was broken to that point? Where the listed as
automatically installed? One or the other will tell you. If you choose to
ignore the help and/or the output of said commands the problem is yours.
For the record I have not read the docs on aptitude, only the help
provided with aptitude. So don't you dare blather that aptitude doesn't tell
you. It does.
|
Now this is different.
In your previous message you said "Since aptitude does tell you exactly
why it is removing packages if the user cannot take in that information
it is PEBKAC. "
Here you say that by reading the aptitude help one can understand.
It is not the same! I agree with you (even though I didn't test
aptitude's help menu but I read /usr/share/doc/aptitude/README).
Now for those who might still be reading this (how boring it must be !
I'm sorry.) let's get this clear : even though I do not like aptitude,
I'm not saying anything bad about it. I am glad it exists, providing
additionnal possibilities to what apt-get offers. There is even one I
wish I could have using apt-get : a log file.
I am not saying the examples I gave cannot be understood; I am not
saying they are representatives of what happens using aptitude. On the
contrary, I think they are the sign of an unusually broken aptitude on
my machine.
I am convinced aptitude does what it does for good reasons and it can be
understood reading the doc.
I am just saying the messages displayed by aptitude in the lower part of
the UI are not as straigthforward as they seem and should sometimes be
read with caution. Nothing more !
--
Eddy
"La notion de passoire est indépendante de la notion de trou."
Les Shadoks
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Steven C. Block
*nix forums Guru Wannabe
Joined: 11 Mar 2005
Posts: 117
|
| Posted: Sat Feb 05, 2005 5:10 pm Post subject:
Re: aptitude vs. apt-get
|
|
|
On Sat, Feb 05, 2005 at 04:49:46PM +0100, Matthias wrote:
| Quote: | Steve Lamb wrote:
PEBKAC, for the uninitiated... Problem exists between keyboard and
chair.
:D
For myself, I never use aptitude through the curses interface. I almost
exclusively use its command line interface, and even that is many times
better than that of apt-get.
For example, I can tell aptitude directly to purge a package, instead of
remove --purge (apt-way). It's overall more intuitive to use.
If I want a fully fledged user interface, I would use synaptic instead.
I have never felt the urge to have a user interface for package
management though.
|
If you like using aptitude through the CLI, have you given wajig a try?
I tend to use it for all my command line work, then aptitude if I need
to browse by category, etc. Its worth taking a look at if you haven't
tried it yet.
--
Steve Block
http://ev-15.com/
http://www.steveblock.com/
scblock@ev-15.com
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Matthias Kaeppler
*nix forums Guru Wannabe
Joined: 14 Mar 2005
Posts: 249
|
| Posted: Sat Feb 05, 2005 3:10 pm Post subject:
Re: aptitude vs. apt-get
|
|
|
Steve Lamb wrote:
| Quote: | PEBKAC, for the uninitiated... Problem exists between keyboard and
chair.
:D |
For myself, I never use aptitude through the curses interface. I almost
exclusively use its command line interface, and even that is many times
better than that of apt-get.
For example, I can tell aptitude directly to purge a package, instead of
remove --purge (apt-way). It's overall more intuitive to use.
If I want a fully fledged user interface, I would use synaptic instead.
I have never felt the urge to have a user interface for package
management though.
--
Regards,
Matthias
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Rogério Brito
*nix forums Guru Wannabe
Joined: 01 Mar 2005
Posts: 226
|
| Posted: Sat Feb 05, 2005 3:00 pm Post subject:
Re: aptitude vs. apt-get
|
|
|
On Feb 04 2005, Andreas Rippl wrote:
| Quote: | But in the spirit of simple building blocks used to create more
complicated actions a
deborphan | xargs apt-get -y remove
|
I always like to use deborphan with the "--guess-all" option and apt-get
with the "--purge" option.
Well, in fact, I filter deborphan's output through "grep -v libc6-i686", so
that it doesn't remove this package.
Since I like to have a minimal system, I prefer apt-get, but I see that
some people may prefer aptitude instead of apt-get when they don't have
this "always minimal" state of mind.
Just my two cents, Rogério.
--
Learn to quote e-mails decently at:
http://pub.tsn.dk/how-to-quote.php
http://learn.to/quote
http://www.xs4all.nl/~sbpoley/toppost.htm
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Steve Lamb
*nix forums Guru
Joined: 25 Feb 2005
Posts: 601
|
| Posted: Sat Feb 05, 2005 2:30 am Post subject:
Re: aptitude vs. apt-get
|
|
|
Eddy wrote:
| Quote: | Steve Lamb a écrit le 04/02/05 23:50 :
The OP said he didn't like aptitude's behaviour.
Why do *you* have a problem with that ? You must have one though because
I can't see why you would start PEBKACking him otherwise.
|
Because he stated that it was for random reasons when the reasons are
clearly explained. That is just pure FUD because he has some irrational
dislike for aptitude and is spreading it here. Pardon me if I dislike
irrational FUD being spewed and respond accordingly.
| Quote: | Seriously, I admit there probably is an explanation to the aptitude
behaviour.
|
Yup, chances are installing one of those two packages causes a dependancy
cascade which updates others to the point where they are no longer needed and
automatically removed.
| Quote: | I haven't got a problem with that but I just don't see why I
should bother trying to understand aptitude when apt-get does the job I
want.
|
That's fine. That is quite different than saying something completely BS
about aptitude.
| Quote: | As for your assertion that "aptitude does tell you exactly why it is
removing packages", well it simply is not true. At least not always. And
when it does it's not always correct.
(Again aptitude's doc probably provides explanations but don't pretend
that those informations are provided by aptitude itself.)
|
It is.
| Quote: | Example 1.
I start aptitude and type "g" to see what it plans to do.
It wants to remove vim as an "unused" package. As far as unused packages
go, I use this one everyday. Well let's read further... "It was
installed automatically". Well that's a lie : I installed it on pupose
but I didn't do it with aptitude. I can accept this kind of behaviour
but I will certainly not consider the message displayed as correct.
|
That's PEBKAC. Simply mark it + and that goes away. Not all that hard.
In fact you can get rid of it by hitting + on the "installed software".
Personally I do that then M on the libraries.
| Quote: | Example 2
It will remove libgnutls11-dev because it has 4 missing dependencies.
Well apt-get installing those show that they are installed with the
latest versions; apt-get install libgnutls11-dev tells the same.
|
Are you sure? What does aptitude say when you trace the dependacies back?
You know, hit d, see what is missing, check to see what it has in its
database. You /are/ aware that apt-get and aptitude *do not use the same
database*, right? Did you do an aptitude update first?
| Quote: | Example 3
It will install festival. Why ? It sure doesn't say and I really don't
need it. The same goes for a lot of other packages.
|
aptitude installs recommends. Hit r and it will tell you what is
dependant or recommending that package. Alternatively hit the options and
turn off install recommends. For the record festival is recommended by
screader and education-music, do you have either of those installed?
| Quote: | I am not saying there is no reason to do it (and it is probably due to
the options regarding dependencies) but do not tell me that aptitude
gives the reason for its actions.
|
r to see what is dependant or recommending a package isn't telling you?
There's 2 possibilities here.
a: You're ignorant of that command which means you haven't read the help
aptitude provides. PEBKAC.
b: You're ignoring that command and how to use it. PEBKAC.
| Quote: | Example 4
It wants to remove alsa, anacron and lots of other basic stuff and once
again does not provide any reason.
|
Did you hit d to see what was broken to that point? Where the listed as
automatically installed? One or the other will tell you. If you choose to
ignore the help and/or the output of said commands the problem is yours.
For the record I have not read the docs on aptitude, only the help
provided with aptitude. So don't you dare blather that aptitude doesn't tell
you. It does.
--
Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your
PGP Key: 8B6E99C5 | main connection to the switchboard of souls.
-------------------------------+--------------------------------------------- |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Steve Lamb
*nix forums Guru
Joined: 25 Feb 2005
Posts: 601
|
| Posted: Sat Feb 05, 2005 2:30 am Post subject:
Re: aptitude vs. apt-get
|
|
|
Antti Tolamo wrote:
| Quote: | I'm just curious, has something important changed between Woody
and Sarge, concerning Debian package system?
|
Yes. Packages are quite fluid and moving from one distribution to another
within Debian often causes a mass of un/installs. A goodly portion of this
are updates from one epic or another or package splits. For example I still
remember when telnet was a single package and not split out into telnet, and
telnetd.
--
Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your
PGP Key: 8B6E99C5 | main connection to the switchboard of souls.
-------------------------------+--------------------------------------------- |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Jason Bleazard
*nix forums beginner
Joined: 05 Feb 2005
Posts: 3
|
| Posted: Sat Feb 05, 2005 1:00 am Post subject:
Re: aptitude vs. apt-get
|
|
|
On February 4, 2005 07:39 pm, Eddy wrote:
| Quote: |
I start aptitude and type "g" to see what it plans to do.
It wants to remove vim as an "unused" package. As far as unused packages
go, I use this one everyday. Well let's read further... "It was
installed automatically". Well that's a lie : I installed it on pupose
but I didn't do it with aptitude. I can accept this kind of behaviour
but I will certainly not consider the message displayed as correct.
|
It sounds like you've already decided against aptitude, but for anyone else
reading this thread...
You can fix this flag manually by pressing 'm'.
In my experience, aptitude always has a reason for whatever weird things it
might want to do. I might not agree with the reason, but at least I can find
it.
I personally like aptitude, because it helps keep the cruft off my system.
But I find that I do have to keep an eye on it.
Jason |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Antti Tolamo
*nix forums beginner
Joined: 19 Feb 2005
Posts: 5
|
| Posted: Sat Feb 05, 2005 1:00 am Post subject:
Re: aptitude vs. apt-get
|
|
|
Eddy wrote:
| Quote: |
It will install festival. Why ? It sure doesn't say and I really don't
need it. The same goes for a lot of other packages.
I am not saying there is no reason to do it (and it is probably due to
the options regarding dependencies) but do not tell me that aptitude
gives the reason for its actions.
|
I haven't done RTFM with manual concerning aptitude, apt and dselct. But
since I've upgraded
in a week to Sarge and installed another fresh one, I've been getting lot of
stuff I didn't ask for and where it isn't question about depencies. Not
only that, suddenly I sometimes find out that things are about to be removed
by bundles. It's also dselect, not just aptitude.
Can be however that I've made mistakes, human is usually weakest
link IMHO.
I'm just curious, has something important changed between Woody
and Sarge, concerning Debian package system?
Antti
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Steven C. Block
*nix forums Guru Wannabe
Joined: 11 Mar 2005
Posts: 117
|
| Posted: Sat Feb 05, 2005 12:50 am Post subject:
Re: aptitude vs. apt-get
|
|
|
On Sat, Feb 05, 2005 at 01:39:02AM +0100, Eddy wrote:
| Quote: | Steve Lamb a écrit le 04/02/05 23:50 :
nori heikkinen wrote:
on Thu, 03 Feb 2005 02:41:42PM -0600, Ron Johnson insinuated:
Some of us dislike aptitude because it insists on removing packages
for seemingly random reasons.
My system (sarge) is updated regularly.
Right now, apt-get -s upgrade shows nothing to install and 2 packages
kept back.
apt-get -s dist-upgrade explains why : 2 additionnal packages should be
installed to fulfill the (new) dependencies of those 2 kept back packages.
aptitude -s dist-upgrade wants to install 25 new packages and remove 37
others !
Since aptitude does tell you exactly why it is removing packages if
the user cannot take in that information it is PEBKAC.
The OP said he didn't like aptitude's behaviour.
Why do *you* have a problem with that ? You must have one though because
I can't see why you would start PEBKACking him otherwise.
Seriously, I admit there probably is an explanation to the aptitude
behaviour. I haven't got a problem with that but I just don't see why I
should bother trying to understand aptitude when apt-get does the job I
want.
As for your assertion that "aptitude does tell you exactly why it is
removing packages", well it simply is not true. At least not always. And
when it does it's not always correct.
(Again aptitude's doc probably provides explanations but don't pretend
that those informations are provided by aptitude itself.)
Example 1.
I start aptitude and type "g" to see what it plans to do.
It wants to remove vim as an "unused" package. As far as unused packages
go, I use this one everyday. Well let's read further... "It was
installed automatically". Well that's a lie : I installed it on pupose
but I didn't do it with aptitude. I can accept this kind of behaviour
but I will certainly not consider the message displayed as correct.
Example 2
It will remove libgnutls11-dev because it has 4 missing dependencies.
Well apt-get installing those show that they are installed with the
latest versions; apt-get install libgnutls11-dev tells the same.
Example 3
It will install festival. Why ? It sure doesn't say and I really don't
need it. The same goes for a lot of other packages.
I am not saying there is no reason to do it (and it is probably due to
the options regarding dependencies) but do not tell me that aptitude
gives the reason for its actions.
Example 4
It wants to remove alsa, anacron and lots of other basic stuff and once
again does not provide any reason.
... or installing huge numbers of packages on a whim
Then turn off installing recommends by default. Again, if a user
doesn't even give a quick glance to the options aptitude has then it is
PEBKAC.
OK. I did that. F10 -> Options -> Gestion des dépendances where I
deselected everything : no automatic resolution of dependencies, no
correction of broken packages, no recommended packages and no
suppression of unused packages.
Unfortunately, it still insists on doing the actions mentioned above.
Closing aptitude and starting it again doesn't change anything but using
the command line doesn't give the same result as before. He now only
wants to remove 1 package and install 7 new ones (and update the 2 that
were kept back).
Well, as I said, I won't bother with aptitude as long as apt-get does
the job. Yet I'd be curious to understand why the options chosen in the
UI do not have any influence in the UI itself but do on the command
line. Weird.
|
A lot of this sounds to me like aptitude's package cache is broken. You
could try moving /var/lib/apitude/pkgstates somewhere else and running it again
to see if that fixes anything.
--
Steve Block
http://ev-15.com/
http://www.steveblock.com/
scblock@ev-15.com
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Google
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
The time now is Thu Jan 08, 2009 6:40 pm | All times are GMT
|
|
Debt Consolidation | Debt Consolidation | Loans | Home Equity Loan | Personal Finance
|
|
Copyright © 2004-2005 DeniX Solutions SRL
|
|
|
|
Other DeniX Solutions sites:
Unix/Linux blog |
electronics forum |
medicine forum |
science forum |
|
|
Privacy Policy
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
Forum index
»
*nix
»
Linux
»
Distributions
»
Debian
