Re: aptitude is dangerous - any replacement?

2017-03-21 23:02 keltezéssel, Vincent Lefevre írta: > On 2017-03-21 16:21:25 +0100, Nemeth Gyorgy wrote: >> 2017-03-21 14:38 keltezéssel, Vincent Lefevre írta: >>> Yes, but one can't exclude a package listed by apt-listbugs. >> You can. Just press 'h' (hold), and don't continue apt-get. > I didn't

Re: aptitude is dangerous - any replacement?

What I do if I want to use experimental (or sid if I am on testing) is to put the deb-src-lines in my sources.list and then build a package when needed. I find wajig convenient to use (another front end to apt) in this case e.g. $ wajig build julia Regards Johann -- Because experiencing your loy

Re: Need to upgrade claws-mail on debian 7.1

On Tue, 21 Mar 2017 08:44:18 + Joe wrote: > On Mon, 20 Mar 2017 15:12:38 -0700 > Patrick Bartek wrote: > > > On Mon, 20 Mar 2017 19:44:40 + Joe wrote: > > > > > On Mon, 20 Mar 2017 09:13:11 -0700 > > > Patrick Bartek wrote: > > > > > > > On Mon, 20 Mar 2017 04:47:50 + "Blair,

Re: installer defaults for desktops (was Re: Suggested edit)

On 2017-03-21 at 20:52, Catherine Gramze wrote: >> On Mar 21, 2017, at 7:20 PM, David Wright >> wrote: >> >>> On Tue 21 Mar 2017 at 15:44:18 (-0400), Catherine Gramze wrote: >>> >>> The installer allows you to continue the installation without a >>> configured network card, and it shouldn't. >>

Re: installer defaults for desktops (was Re: Suggested edit)

Sent from my iPad > On Mar 21, 2017, at 7:20 PM, David Wright wrote: > >> On Tue 21 Mar 2017 at 15:44:18 (-0400), Catherine Gramze wrote: >> >> The installer allows you to continue the installation without a configured >> network card, and it shouldn't. > > Please explain how this statement

Unattended upgrades. Debian methods, please, not Ubuntu.

tl:dnr: How do I get unattended upgrades a) to function and b) to tell me when it has upgraded something. With Debian unattended-upgrades installed I can't make out form Adam whether they have run. I have run: # cd /var/log/unattended-upgrades/ # cat unattended-upgrades-shutdown.log # cat unatt

Re: aptitude is dangerous - any replacement?

On 2017-03-21 16:55:36 -0600, Joe Pfeiffer wrote: > Vincent Lefevre writes: > > By default, the apt preferences are such that unstable is preferred > > over experimental. But as explained in > > > > https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=795228 > > > > this is not the case with aptitu

Re: installer defaults for desktops (was Re: Suggested edit)

On Tue 21 Mar 2017 at 15:44:18 (-0400), Catherine Gramze wrote: > Sent from my iPad > > > On Mar 21, 2017, at 3:10 PM, Greg Wooledge wrote: > > > > On Tue, Mar 21, 2017 at 02:44:42PM -0400, Catherine Gramze wrote: > >>> On Mar 21, 2017, at 2:12 PM, Greg Wooledge wrote: > >>> > >>> wrong > >>

Re: aptitude is dangerous - any replacement?

Vincent Lefevre writes: > On 2017-03-21 21:39:40 +0100, Sven Joachim wrote: >> On 2017-03-21 21:19 +0100, Vincent Lefevre wrote: >> > aptitude ignores the apt preferences. >> >> Huh? At least on my systems, it obeys them. > > Perhaps with your configuration. And this is probably also true when

Re: aptitude is dangerous - any replacement?

On 2017-03-21 16:21:25 +0100, Nemeth Gyorgy wrote: > 2017-03-21 14:38 keltezéssel, Vincent Lefevre írta: > > Yes, but one can't exclude a package listed by apt-listbugs. > > You can. Just press 'h' (hold), and don't continue apt-get. I didn't know that apt-listbugs could do that. This is not doc

Re: aptitude is dangerous - any replacement?

On 2017-03-21 21:39:40 +0100, Sven Joachim wrote: > On 2017-03-21 21:19 +0100, Vincent Lefevre wrote: > > aptitude ignores the apt preferences. > > Huh? At least on my systems, it obeys them. Perhaps with your configuration. And this is probably also true when the full resolver is not involved.

Re: aptitude is dangerous - any replacement?

On 2017-03-21 21:19 +0100, Vincent Lefevre wrote: > On 2017-03-21 08:36:40 -0600, Joe Pfeiffer wrote: >> See the apt_preferences man page for information on prioritizing >> distributions. My own preferences file contains >> >> Package: * >> Pin: release a=testing >> Pin-Priority: 700 >> >> Pack

Re: Where is data stored when Synaptic scans DVDs?

On Mon 20 Mar 2017 at 20:23:48 -0500, David Wright wrote: > On Mon 20 Mar 2017 at 23:03:29 (+), Brian wrote: > > On Sun 19 Mar 2017 at 23:25:47 -0500, David Wright wrote: > > > > > On Sun 19 Mar 2017 at 08:50:55 (-0500), Richard Owlett wrote: > > > > On 03/19/2017 08:08 AM, David Wright wrote

Re: aptitude is dangerous - any replacement?

On 2017-03-21 08:36:40 -0600, Joe Pfeiffer wrote: > See the apt_preferences man page for information on prioritizing > distributions. My own preferences file contains > > Package: * > Pin: release a=testing > Pin-Priority: 700 > > Package: * > Pin: release a=stable > Pin-Priority: 650 > > Packa

Re: installer defaults for desktops (was Re: Suggested edit)

Sent from my iPad > On Mar 21, 2017, at 3:10 PM, Greg Wooledge wrote: > > On Tue, Mar 21, 2017 at 02:44:42PM -0400, Catherine Gramze wrote: >>> On Mar 21, 2017, at 2:12 PM, Greg Wooledge wrote: >>> >>> wrong >> >> Then use a different installer! > > No. Stop telling other people what to d

Re: installer defaults for desktops (was Re: Suggested edit)

On Tuesday 21 March 2017 18:38:44 Catherine Gramze wrote: > And I specified it was the netinst about 8 posts ago, immediately in > response to you asking. And I have repeatedly since then mentioned netinst. > You might try reading what I say instead of skimming it for things to > object to. The on

Re: installer defaults for desktops (was Re: Suggested edit)

Sent from my iPad > On Mar 21, 2017, at 2:12 PM, Greg Wooledge wrote: > > > That doesn't mean the installer should refuse to work. There is > absolutely nothing wrong with doing a minimal install using a netinst > image to get a working Debian system. Maybe you want to do the first > part o

Re: installer defaults for desktops (was Re: Suggested edit)

On Tue, Mar 21, 2017 at 02:44:42PM -0400, Catherine Gramze wrote: > > On Mar 21, 2017, at 2:12 PM, Greg Wooledge wrote: > > > > wrong > > Then use a different installer! No. Stop telling other people what to do. Stop trying to take away OPTIONS from other people. I will continue to use the n

Re: installer defaults for desktops (was Re: Suggested edit)

On Tue, Mar 21, 2017 at 01:15:32PM -0400, Catherine Gramze wrote: > But a netinst dvd or usb stick is not the best tool for that. The very name > lets you know that a network is going to be needed. Netinst is not the only > installer, you know. The name does indeed imply that a network will be req

Re: installer defaults for desktops (was Re: Suggested edit)

Sent from my iPad > On Mar 21, 2017, at 2:12 PM, Greg Wooledge wrote: > > wrong Then use a different installer! The netinst dvd leaves you with what would be considered a crippled system by most people. Requiring a functioning network card removes that possibility for the noob while still a

Re: Using Samsung tablets for Debian

On 3/21/17 3:26 AM, Darac Marjal wrote: On Tue, Mar 21, 2017 at 03:58:15AM +, Don Littlefield wrote: Hello, I want to buy a Samsung tablet and want to load Debian on it. My question is do I need to get a tablet that is unlocked to do this? Does this have anything to do with the Linux pr

Re: installer defaults for desktops (was Re: Suggested edit)

Sent from my iPad > On Mar 21, 2017, at 2:01 PM, Lisi Reisz wrote: > >> On Tuesday 21 March 2017 17:15:32 Catherine Gramze wrote: >> Sent from my iPad >> On Mar 21, 2017, at 11:10 AM, Greg Wooledge wrote: > On Tue, Mar 21, 2017 at 02:55:07PM +, Lisi Reisz wrote: > On Tuesday

Re: installer defaults for desktops (was Re: Suggested edit)

On Tue, Mar 21, 2017 at 06:03:12PM +, Lisi Reisz wrote: > On Tuesday 21 March 2017 17:15:32 Catherine Gramze wrote: > > Sent from my iPad > > Note it is sent from an iPad! Open Source all the way! > > Incidentally, why did we need to know that? It's about as relevant to this list as you

Re: installer defaults for desktops (was Re: Suggested edit)

On Tue, Mar 21, 2017 at 01:15:32PM -0400, Catherine Gramze wrote: > Of course they should. But a netinst dvd or usb stick is not the best tool > for that. The very name lets you know that a network is going to be needed. > Netinst is not the only installer, you know. That doesn't mean the instal

Re: installer defaults for desktops (was Re: Suggested edit)

On Tuesday 21 March 2017 17:15:32 Catherine Gramze wrote: > Sent from my iPad Note it is sent from an iPad! Open Source all the way! Incidentally, why did we need to know that? Lisi

Re: installer defaults for desktops (was Re: Suggested edit)

On Tuesday 21 March 2017 17:15:32 Catherine Gramze wrote: > Sent from my iPad > > > On Mar 21, 2017, at 11:10 AM, Greg Wooledge wrote: > >> On Tue, Mar 21, 2017 at 02:55:07PM +, Lisi Reisz wrote: > >>> On Tuesday 21 March 2017 14:33:29 Catherine Gramze wrote: > >>> Refusing to continue an inst

Re: installer defaults for desktops (was Re: Suggested edit)

Sent from my iPad > On Mar 21, 2017, at 11:10 AM, Greg Wooledge wrote: > >> On Tue, Mar 21, 2017 at 02:55:07PM +, Lisi Reisz wrote: >>> On Tuesday 21 March 2017 14:33:29 Catherine Gramze wrote: >>> Refusing to continue an installation that will inevitably be a failure is >>> how it should

Re: installer defaults for desktops (was Re: Suggested edit)

On Tue 21 Mar 2017 at 10:33:29 (-0400), Catherine Gramze wrote: > Sent from my iPad > > > On Mar 21, 2017, at 6:31 AM, Lisi Reisz wrote: > > > >> On Tuesday 21 March 2017 02:58:50 Catherine Gramze wrote: > >> The installer allows you to continue the installation without a configured > >> network

Re: aptitude is dangerous - any replacement?

2017-03-21 14:38 keltezéssel, Vincent Lefevre írta: > Yes, but one can't exclude a package listed by apt-listbugs. You can. Just press 'h' (hold), and don't continue apt-get. On the next apt-get start this package will be in 'hold' state. And later apt-listbugs will unhold the package automatical

Re: installer defaults for desktops (was Re: Suggested edit)

On Tue, Mar 21, 2017 at 02:55:07PM +, Lisi Reisz wrote: > On Tuesday 21 March 2017 14:33:29 Catherine Gramze wrote: > > Refusing to continue an installation that will inevitably be a failure is > > how it should act. > > Rot. It will not "inevitably be a failure". It can be a very good way o

Re: aptitude is dangerous - any replacement?

Vincent Lefevre writes: > I've just noticed that aptitude upgraded packages from unstable to > experimental versions (just with 'U' from the UI) without any warning!!! > Again. > > Is there any replacement? Or a way to make aptitude ignore > experimental packages? > > Note: I still want to keep e

[retraction] aptitude is dangerous - any replacement?

On 2017-03-21 12:31:29 +0100, Vincent Lefevre wrote: > I've just noticed that aptitude upgraded packages from unstable to > experimental versions (just with 'U' from the UI) without any warning!!! After a closer look, I've found that aptitude was not the culprit here. The apt-show-versions utilit

Re: aptitude is dangerous - any replacement?

On Tuesday 21 March 2017 11:31:29 Vincent Lefevre wrote: > Is there any replacement? Or a way to make aptitude ignore > experimental packages? > > Note: I still want to keep experimental in my sources.list for the > cases where I *explicitly* request experimental packages. Can experimental not be

Re: installer defaults for desktops (was Re: Suggested edit)

On Tuesday 21 March 2017 14:33:29 Catherine Gramze wrote: > Refusing to continue an installation that will inevitably be a failure is > how it should act. Rot. It will not "inevitably be a failure". It can be a very good way out of some problems. Lisi

Re: installer defaults for desktops (was Re: Suggested edit)

On Tuesday 21 March 2017 11:59:39 Greg Wooledge wrote: > Sure, if you *don't change the default selection*, you probably get > GNOME.  Is that what you meant by "don't actually select anything"? > Just accepting whatever the default is, without reading or changing > what's on the screen? Exactly t

Re: aptitude is dangerous - any replacement?

On 2017-03-21 09:03:47 -0500, David Wright wrote: > On Tue 21 Mar 2017 at 14:10:09 (+0100), Vincent Lefevre wrote: > > Now... After a closer look, I've found that aptitude was not the > > culprit here. > > Perhaps you could write this in a reply to the OP so that people > don't have to wade throug

Re: installer defaults for desktops (was Re: Suggested edit)

Sent from my iPad > On Mar 21, 2017, at 6:31 AM, Lisi Reisz wrote: > >> On Tuesday 21 March 2017 02:58:50 Catherine Gramze wrote: >> The installer allows you to continue the installation without a configured >> network card, and it shouldn't. > > Of course it should *allow* you to do so. And

Re: aptitude is dangerous - any replacement?

On Tue 21 Mar 2017 at 14:10:09 (+0100), Vincent Lefevre wrote: > Now... After a closer look, I've found that aptitude was not the > culprit here. Perhaps you could write this in a reply to the OP so that people don't have to wade through the thread to the middle of a posting to find this out. It c

Re: aptitude is dangerous - any replacement?

>> apt also uses apt-listbugs... > >Yes, but one can't exclude a package listed by apt-listbugs. >With aptitude, one just goes to the package and hits ":". Sure. Just press h on the package. -nik

Re: aptitude is dangerous - any replacement?

On 2017-03-21 14:27:38 +0100, Dominik George wrote: > >1. When I want to exclude some buggy packages. I often do this with > > aptitude, where major bugs can be reported by apt-listbugs. > > apt also uses apt-listbugs... Yes, but one can't exclude a package listed by apt-listbugs. With aptitude

Re: aptitude is dangerous - any replacement?

>1. When I want to exclude some buggy packages. I often do this with > aptitude, where major bugs can be reported by apt-listbugs. apt also uses apt-listbugs... -nik

Re: aptitude is dangerous - any replacement?

On 2017-03-21 13:02:02 +0100, Dominik George wrote: > >I meant a replacement with a text UI. > > I never had any situation where this would have helped me instead of > being clumsy and painful within 12 years of systems administration. > > What's your use case? 1. When I want to exclude some bug

Re: aptitude is dangerous - any replacement?

On 2017-03-21 08:00:52 -0400, Stefan Monnier wrote: > > Note: I still want to keep experimental in my sources.list for the > > cases where I *explicitly* request experimental packages. > > I keep these extra thingies commented out in my sources.list and > whenever I want to explicitly request some

Re: aptitude is dangerous - any replacement?

On Tue, Mar 21, 2017 at 12:31:29PM +0100, Vincent Lefevre wrote: I've just noticed that aptitude upgraded packages from unstable to experimental versions (just with 'U' from the UI) without any warning!!! Again. Is there any replacement? Or a way to make aptitude ignore experimental packages? N

Re: Where is data stored when Synaptic scans DVDs?

On Tue, Mar 21, 2017 at 02:27:47AM +, Lisi Reisz wrote: > Brian, I squirmed. "Data is" ... I can just about handle. I CANNOT (yes, I > can shout too!) handle "agenda is". Agenda are always more than one > thing. That is not how the word is used in current English. Just run "dict agen

Re: aptitude is dangerous - any replacement?

On 21/03/17 23:00, Stefan Monnier wrote: Note: I still want to keep experimental in my sources.list for the cases where I *explicitly* request experimental packages. I keep these extra thingies commented out in my sources.list and whenever I want to explicitly request some package from them, I

Re: aptitude is dangerous - any replacement?

>I meant a replacement with a text UI. I never had any situation where this would have helped me instead of being clumsy and painful within 12 years of systems administration. What's your use case? -nik

Re: aptitude is dangerous - any replacement?

> Note: I still want to keep experimental in my sources.list for the > cases where I *explicitly* request experimental packages. I keep these extra thingies commented out in my sources.list and whenever I want to explicitly request some package from them, I uncomment the line, redo the `update` an

Re: installer defaults for desktops (was Re: Suggested edit)

On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 11:48:51PM +, Lisi Reisz wrote: > The question is what you get by default if you don't actually select > anything - desktop or no desktop. I got Gnome, so got a desktop. The last Debian install I have done was for jessie (netinst). Like every recent version of Debian

Re: aptitude is dangerous - any replacement?

> I meant a replacement with a text UI. dselect is still in the repository, though it's deprecated. -- "It is said that no one truly knows a nation until one has been inside its jails. A nation should not be judged by how it treats its highest citizens, but its lowest ones." -- Nelson Mand

Re: aptitude is dangerous - any replacement?

To upgrade I always do apt-get update && apt-get upgrade. When jumping releases I also use apt-get dist-upgrade This seems to be the safest option thus far (my systems have been running smoothly). On 21/03/17 22:37, Vincent Lefevre wrote: On 2017-03-21 12:34:23 +0100, Dominik George wrote:

Re: aptitude is dangerous - any replacement?

On 2017-03-21 12:34:23 +0100, Dominik George wrote: > >Is there any replacement? > > Yes, apt. I meant a replacement with a text UI. -- Vincent Lefèvre - Web: 100% accessible validated (X)HTML - Blog: Work: CR INRIA - computer arithmetic

Re: Using Samsung tablets for Debian

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Tue, Mar 21, 2017 at 10:49:18AM +, Darac Marjal wrote: [...] > I did, yes. I seem to be seeing more malapropisms in my writing > lately, but I think it's a case of PEBKAC :) Oh, no. Don't fight it. It's creativity :) regards - -- t -BEGI

Re: aptitude is dangerous - any replacement?

>Is there any replacement? Yes, apt. -nik

aptitude is dangerous - any replacement?

I've just noticed that aptitude upgraded packages from unstable to experimental versions (just with 'U' from the UI) without any warning!!! Again. Is there any replacement? Or a way to make aptitude ignore experimental packages? Note: I still want to keep experimental in my sources.list for the c

Re: installer defaults for desktops (was Re: Suggested edit)

On 2017-03-21, Lisi Reisz wrote: > On Tuesday 21 March 2017 00:38:36 Richard Owlett wrote: >> With the installer from DVD 1 of 13 the first option in taskel is for >> choosing to have a desktop - the default is yes. > > Thanks, Richard! This is as I expected - the default is to have a > desktop.

Re: Using Samsung tablets for Debian

On Tue, Mar 21, 2017 at 11:36:10AM +0100, to...@tuxteam.de wrote: On Tue, Mar 21, 2017 at 10:26:48AM +, Darac Marjal wrote: On Tue, Mar 21, 2017 at 03:58:15AM +, Don Littlefield wrote: [...] This kind of lock is illegal in certain restrictions, You probably mean jurisdictions. Alth

Re: Using Samsung tablets for Debian

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Tue, Mar 21, 2017 at 10:26:48AM +, Darac Marjal wrote: > On Tue, Mar 21, 2017 at 03:58:15AM +, Don Littlefield wrote: > [...] This kind of lock is illegal in certain restrictions, You probably mean jurisdictions. Although the lapsus would

Re: installer defaults for desktops (was Re: Suggested edit)

On Tuesday 21 March 2017 02:58:50 Catherine Gramze wrote: > The installer allows you to continue the installation without a configured > network card, and it shouldn't. Of course it should *allow* you to do so. And it does warn you. Not allow you indeed! People open viruses, help telephone sca

Re: installer defaults for desktops (was Re: Suggested edit)

On 03/20/2017 09:05 PM, Lisi Reisz wrote: On Tuesday 21 March 2017 00:38:36 Richard Owlett wrote: With the installer from DVD 1 of 13 the first option in taskel is for choosing to have a desktop - the default is yes. Thanks, Richard! This is as I expected - the default is to have a desktop.

Re: Using Samsung tablets for Debian

On Tue, Mar 21, 2017 at 03:58:15AM +, Don Littlefield wrote: Hello, I want to buy a Samsung tablet and want to load Debian on it. My question is do I need to get a tablet that is unlocked to do this? Does this have anything to do with the Linux program operation on the device? I do not want

Re: Cancel subscription

"Cancel" here. https://www.debian.org/MailingLists/unsubscribe You are just posting to everyone.e in the list currently. On Monday, March 20, 2017, 星空 <1650649...@qq.com> wrote: > yes > ---原始邮件--- > From:"1650649574"<1650649...@qq.com > >; > Date:2017年3月20日(星期一) 下午4:28 > To:"debian-user" >; > Subj

Re: Need to upgrade claws-mail on debian 7.1

On Mon, 20 Mar 2017 15:12:38 -0700 Patrick Bartek wrote: > On Mon, 20 Mar 2017 19:44:40 + Joe wrote: > > > On Mon, 20 Mar 2017 09:13:11 -0700 > > Patrick Bartek wrote: > > > > > On Mon, 20 Mar 2017 04:47:50 + "Blair, Charles E III" > > > wrote: > > > > > > >I am using debian