On Wed, 30 Jun 2004 19:48:45 +0000, Adam Funk wrote: > On Wednesday 30 June 2004 17:10, Karl Hegbloom wrote: > >> On Wed, 2004-06-30 at 13:41 +0000, Adam Funk wrote: >>> I just did an apt-get upgrade and it kept a lot of packages back. I >>> tried to apt-get install a few of them and it threatened to remove >>> packages I need.
It may be that you'll have to use trial and error to find a few (or even one) package to update, repeating that process until your system is up to date. During a recent upgrade, I finally gave up and wrote down the names of a dozen or so packages that aptitude insisted were going to be removed. A few package upgrades later, I was able to re-install the latest versions of all of them. If there's an easier way, I'd like to know about it, but I don't lose any sleep over it. >> I really enjoy "aptitude" for package management. In this situation, I haven't found the behavior of apt-get and aptitude to be different. There are occasions, updating against sid, when attempting to upgrade a single package causes a large cascade (many packages installed, upgraded, and removed). >> Aptitude also adds some cool features that you will not want to do >> without once you discover them. Agreed. I now use aptitude and I recommend it. > If I started using aptitude and decided to go back to using apt-get, > would any problems arise? Not really. Aptitude manages the status of packages differently from apt-get, so they're not 100% interchangeable. The difference I noticed, switching from aptitude to synaptic and back, was that synaptic did not track the packages which were installed solely to resolve dependencies. I liked apt-get and Synaptic has been getting better with each release. The "automatically installed" tracking of aptitude is, in my opinion, enough to make it the package manager of choice. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
