Hi, I had the same problem. I wanted to get a package from the FTP site that was not on my CD and did not know how to make dselect load just the package I was interested in. I tried to unselect everything from the topmost section, but it did not work. I read in one of the help files that any operation on a section title would effect all packages in the section, but that did not happen. I read that dpkg-ftp was used by dselect but I could not invoke this from the shell. Attempts to put packages on hold (my understanding was this would prevent it from upgrading) was not easy and I kept getting into dependencies and conflicts. I eventually gave up and let dselect use its defaults and upgrade all the packages.
I am a new user and I probably do not know how to upgrade/get a new package using dselect. I prefer not using dpkg; I prefer something graphical and easy to use. Also, is there a way in dselect to move the cursor to the next/previous section? And is there a way to affect an entire section? Thanks. deepak [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > I am sure that is some ways this problem is the result of my own inexperience, or that it may in fact > already be addressed in the successor to dselect. However, I feel I should mention it in any case. > Using dselect I ftped in wanting to get an upgraded package list for potato. ( most of my system is stable) > I prefer to at least look at the packages in dselect because it will inform me of any required dependences even > if I don't actually install that way. The problem is this. When upgrading the package list dselect marks > everything that was installed as install. For example if I have bc100.0001.deb installed > and potato has a bc100.0002 available this new file is marked for installation. What this means is that dselect > and the dpkg database thinks I want to upgrade hundreds of megs of packages. Dselect is assuming that since I > installed the previous version I must want to upgrade to the new version. This is obviously not tru for all > applications. It also completly undermines dselects abilty to inform me of package dependences. > > My efforts to fix this problem have dug me deeper into the hole and now I will probably be forced to do a > complete reinstall. I think it would me far better for deslect or the new package installation tool to mark > the newer packages as 'upgradeable' rather than assuming I want to install hundreds of megs. > > Thanks you, > > Tom > > > -- > Unsubscribe? mail -s unsubscribe [EMAIL PROTECTED] < /dev/null > > _________________________________________________________ DO YOU YAHOO!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
