On 2016-10-13 00:09:02 +0100, Lisi Reisz wrote: > On Friday 07 October 2016 15:43:17 Vincent Lefevre wrote: > > On 2016-10-04 22:51:34 +0100, Lisi Reisz wrote: > > > On Tuesday 04 October 2016 08:25:46 Vincent Lefevre wrote: > > > > my position remains the same: > > > > aptitude is poorly designed. > > > > > > Fine. So don't use it. But moaning won't help anyone, not even you. > > > You don't like Aptitude. We get the message. So don't use Aptitude. > > > > And what do you propose instead? > > I don't use Sid, so haven't tested out which package managers are good for it > when there are problems, but how about looking at apt or apt-get? Ben says > that he has great success with apt-get. Apt-get is much less aggressive than > aptitude - but less fully featured. > > If I use aptitude with a large number of upgrades, I try to break it up. At > the very least I do > # aptitude update > #aptitude -s safe-upgrade > # aptitude safe-upgrade > # aptitude -s full-upgrade > # aptitude full-upgrade
Sorry for the late reply, but all these may remove important packages, i.e. they have the same issues. -- Vincent Lefèvre <vinc...@vinc17.net> - Web: <https://www.vinc17.net/> 100% accessible validated (X)HTML - Blog: <https://www.vinc17.net/blog/> Work: CR INRIA - computer arithmetic / AriC project (LIP, ENS-Lyon)
