On Tuesday 14 April 2009 16:52, Stefan Monnier wrote: > > I often see that some packages are "kept back" when I do "apt-get > > upgrade", what does it mean? > > It means that there are newer versions of those packages available, but > apt-get refrained from upgrading them. The reasons for that can be that > in order to upgrade those packages, apt-get would need to add or remove > some other packages. > > > Stefan
I remember a while back that Rosegarden was held back for about 6 weeks. that was on Lenny, and I always do an apt-get dist-upgrade. I think that sometimes the problem is, as in the Rosegarden case, that dependencies for Rosegarden need to be upgraded before the Rosegarden version that is being held back, can be installed. The way this seemed to work out, was that the currently installed Rosegarden version would continue to work, then when the needed upgrades for dependencies for the held back new Rosegarden version were available, then, and only then would the held back version of Rosegarden be installed, along with the upgraded dependencies for Rosegarden. Don't know if that makes sense, but it seemed to be the way it worked for me. Nigel. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
