On Monday 19 March 2012 16:39:13 Jochen Spieker wrote: > Lisi: > > On Monday 19 March 2012 12:32:19 Jochen Spieker wrote: > >> The OP has explicitly has explicitly stated that he/she is interested in > >> the reason for the behaviour. Work-arounds are too easy. :) > > > > It's NOT a workaround. It is correct usage. > > Sure it is correct usage, but it hides the reason of aptitude's > behaviour from our understanding. > > > In aptitude if you want > > _everything_ upgraded, you have to say so, otherwise it will > > safe-upgrade and nothing will be removed, and some things will not be > > updated. > > And we are interested to know what these "some things" are in this case. > > > The reason for the behavior is apt-get != aptitude. > > That explanation is not very exhaustive. > > J.
I don't understandwhy you expect them to be identical. Different aplications are usually dissimilar. But you could always write to the aptitude maintainers and the apt maintainers and ask them why tney differ on that particular point. Lisi -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/201203191838.08566.lisi.re...@gmail.com
