On 1/9/19 9:46 AM, Fabian Grünbichler wrote: > On Thu, Jan 03, 2019 at 09:30:38AM +0100, Wolfgang Bumiller wrote: >> On Wed, Nov 28, 2018 at 12:39:15PM +0100, Alwin Antreich wrote: >>> When the package proxmox-ve is not purged the apt config is still there and >>> hinders further use of apt, as it complains about the missing hook. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Alwin Antreich <[email protected]> >>> --- >>> debian/apthook/pve-apt-hook | 1 + >>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) >>> >>> diff --git a/debian/apthook/pve-apt-hook b/debian/apthook/pve-apt-hook >>> index f925090..59e3a29 100755 >>> --- a/debian/apthook/pve-apt-hook >>> +++ b/debian/apthook/pve-apt-hook >>> @@ -60,6 +60,7 @@ while (my $line = <$fh>) { >>> $log->("\n"); >>> $log->("If you really you want to permanently remove >>> '${check_package}' from your system, run the following command\n"); >>> $log->("\ttouch '${check_file}'\n"); >>> + $log->("run apt-get/apt purge ${check_package} to remove the >>> meta-package\n"); >> >> Shouldn't we generally only use `apt` by now > > fine either way for me. > >>> $log->("and repeat your apt-get/apt invocation.\n"); >> >> and also remove `apt-get/` from this line instead? > > well, we don't know whether the user called 'apt-get XX' or 'apt YY' at > this point, hence the reference to both ;) or at least, that was the > original intention behind this wording.
I think our users would figure it out if you just write apt (the tool and package name), or if this really is a concern just use one of: * "and repeat your command" * "and repeat your package system command invoaction" because one could use aptitude too, or not? Then the suggested would be wrong too ;) Either way, just use a single thing in both instances. _______________________________________________ pve-devel mailing list [email protected] https://pve.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pve-devel
