Thanks.
Thats also what the maintainer of dpkg answered me to my bug report.
On 23/12/18 6:49 μ.μ., Pascal Hambourg wrote:
Le 22/12/2018 à 02:44, aprekates a écrit :
Indeed some are virtual or pure virtual (although i dont know the diff)
But also there are packages like 'ergo' which look nor
Le 22/12/2018 à 02:44, aprekates a écrit :
Indeed some are virtual or pure virtual (although i dont know the diff)
But also there are packages like 'ergo' which look normal
and the only relation i think found (reason to display it) is because
libstd++6 depends on it.
Also listed packages like '
Yes, i noticed that w* will pass if there is no such file in
current dir.
But still i cant understand the output so i submit
bugreport Bug#917098:
Thanks all for the feedback.
On 22/12/18 6:13 μ.μ., Joe Pfeiffer wrote:
Dan Ritter writes:
Eduardo M KALINOWSKI wrote:
On 21 de dezembro de 2
Dan Ritter writes:
> Eduardo M KALINOWSKI wrote:
>> On 21 de dezembro de 2018 20:24, aprekates wrote:
>> > In a new installed system with Debian 9.6
>> >
>> > $ dpkg -l
>> >
>> > will list only packages with 'ii' state and a couple of 'rc'.
>> >
>> > But if i run:
>> >
>> > $ dpkg -l w*
>>
Indeed some are virtual or pure virtual (although i dont know the diff)
But also there are packages like 'ergo' which look normal
and the only relation i think found (reason to display it) is because
libstd++6 depends on it.
Also listed packages like 'wink' not in the repos any more.
On 22/12/
On Sat, 22 Dec 2018 01:10:34 +0200
aprekates wrote:
> In my case both:
>
> $ dpkg -l w*
>
> and
>
> $ dpkg -l 'w*'
>
> will report the same list
>
Hi!
I'm getting the same sort of output and it seems to me these are
packages, dpkg knows about providing some virtual packages,
that something
In my case both:
$ dpkg -l w*
and
$ dpkg -l 'w*'
will report the same list
# dpkg -l w*
Desired=Unknown/Install/Remove/Purge/Hold
|
Status=Not/Inst/Conf-files/Unpacked/halF-conf/Half-inst/trig-aWait/Trig-pend
|/ Err?=(none)/Reinst-required (Status,Err: uppercase=bad)
||/ Name
Eduardo M KALINOWSKI wrote:
> On 21 de dezembro de 2018 20:24, aprekates wrote:
> > In a new installed system with Debian 9.6
> >
> > $ dpkg -l
> >
> > will list only packages with 'ii' state and a couple of 'rc'.
> >
> > But if i run:
> >
> > $ dpkg -l w*
> >
> > i will get a dozen also of
On 21 de dezembro de 2018 20:24, aprekates wrote:
> In a new installed system with Debian 9.6
>
> $ dpkg -l
>
> will list only packages with 'ii' state and a couple of 'rc'.
>
> But if i run:
>
> $ dpkg -l w*
>
> i will get a dozen also of 'un' packages.
>
> So i dont understand the logic of
In a new installed system with Debian 9.6
$ dpkg -l
will list only packages with 'ii' state and a couple of 'rc'.
But if i run:
$ dpkg -l w*
i will get a dozen also of 'un' packages.
So i dont understand the logic of altering the output when
i use a pattern . I would expect to see only 'ii'
On Wed, Dec 30, 2009 at 04:13:43 -0600, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
[...]
> I have no idea what the first
> three lines of the dpkg -l output below are trying to tell me.
>
>
> :/# dpkg -l postfix
> Desired=Unknown/Install/Remove/Purge/Hold
> | Status=Not/Inst/Cfg-files/Unpacked
Adam Funk wrote:
> On Tuesday 18 May 2004 10:40, Bob Proulx wrote:
>
> > I would backup /var/backups. That directory includes a copy of the
>
> I already back up /etc. Where do the /var/backups/dpkg.status.* files
> come from?
The come from:
/var/lib/dpkg/status
> > dpkg status file and a
On 18. May 2004 at 2:03PM GMT,
Adam Funk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tuesday 18 May 2004 14:50, Colin Watson wrote:
>
> > Those both set the COLUMNS shell variable but fail to export it to the
> > dpkg subprocess (you need an explicit 'export' to do that).
> > 'COLUMNS=200 dpkg -l' is a speci
On Tuesday 18 May 2004 14:50, Colin Watson wrote:
> Those both set the COLUMNS shell variable but fail to export it to the
> dpkg subprocess (you need an explicit 'export' to do that).
> 'COLUMNS=200 dpkg -l' is a special syntax that adds the variable to
> the environment of the dpkg subprocess wi
On Tue, May 18, 2004 at 08:34:53AM +, Adam Funk wrote:
> I want to dump a complete list of installed packages to a file as part
> of my backup procedure. man dpkg-query suggests using
> --showformat=format, in particular: "Package information can be
> included by inserting variable referenc
On Tue, May 18, 2004 at 01:18:50PM +0100, Thomas Adam wrote:
> --- Adam Funk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Excellent. I had tried these:
> >
> > (COLUMNS=200 ; dpkg -l) |head
> > (COLUMNS=200 && dpkg -l) |head
> >
> > but got the narrow output. Why do these two fail?
>
> Because COLUMNS=200
On Tue, May 18, 2004 at 11:40:53AM +, Adam Funk wrote:
> On Tuesday 18 May 2004 10:20, Thomas Adam wrote:
> > --- Adam Funk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> (Sorry about the long lines but they illustrate the output I'm
> >> talking about.)
> >>
> >> ``dpkg -l'' on its own in a terminal produ
--- Adam Funk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tuesday 18 May 2004 10:20, Thomas Adam wrote:
>
> > --- Adam Funk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >> (Sorry about the long lines but they illustrate the output I'm
> >> talking about.)
> >>
> >> ``dpkg -l'' on its own in a terminal produces wid
On Tuesday 18 May 2004 10:40, Bob Proulx wrote:
> I would backup /var/backups. That directory includes a copy of the
I already back up /etc. Where do the /var/backups/dpkg.status.* files
come from?
> dpkg status file and a few other tidbits from the system. From that
> you can recreate your s
On Tuesday 18 May 2004 10:20, Thomas Adam wrote:
> --- Adam Funk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> (Sorry about the long lines but they illustrate the output I'm
>> talking about.)
>>
>> ``dpkg -l'' on its own in a terminal produces wide output, e.g.:
>
> COLUMNS=200 dpkg -l | pipe | pipe | pip
Adam Funk wrote:
(Sorry about the long lines but they illustrate the output I'm
talking about.)
``dpkg -l'' on its own in a terminal produces wide output, e.g.:
$ dpkg -l perl*
Desired=Unknown/Install/Remove/Purge/Hold
| Status=Not/Installed/Config-files/Unpacked/Failed-config/Half-installed
|/ Er
Adam Funk wrote:
> ``dpkg -l'' on its own in a terminal produces wide output, e.g.:
> [...]
> but when I send its output to a pipe or a file, I get narrow
> output:
I thought dpkg -l used COLUMNS or the current tty columns to base its
output. Which makes me think you have set 'COLUMNS=200 dpkg -
--- Adam Funk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> (Sorry about the long lines but they illustrate the output I'm
> talking about.)
>
> ``dpkg -l'' on its own in a terminal produces wide output, e.g.:
COLUMNS=200 dpkg -l | pipe | pipe | pipe | more | more | yay
Change the value of 200, if it is too
(Sorry about the long lines but they illustrate the output I'm
talking about.)
``dpkg -l'' on its own in a terminal produces wide output, e.g.:
$ dpkg -l perl*
Desired=Unknown/Install/Remove/Purge/Hold
| Status=Not/Installed/Config-files/Unpacked/Failed-config/Half-installed
|/ Err?=(none)/Hold/
On Sun, Dec 21, 2003 at 08:36:38PM +, Colin Watson wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 21, 2003 at 02:56:10PM -0500, Rick Pasotto wrote:
> > When I do 'dpkg -l' now all I get back are installed packages. I used
> > to have to grep for an initial 'i' to get just those. How do I see *all*
> > available packages
On Sun, 21 Dec 2003 20:36:38 +, Colin Watson wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 21, 2003 at 02:56:10PM -0500, Rick Pasotto wrote:
>> When I do 'dpkg -l' now all I get back are installed packages. I used
>> to have to grep for an initial 'i' to get just those. How do I see *all*
>> available packages?
>
>
On Sun, Dec 21, 2003 at 11:45:48PM +0100, GCS wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 21, 2003 at 08:36:38PM +, Colin Watson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > dpkg -l \*
> >
> > It's been like this ever since I started using Debian, IIRC.
>
> Uh-oh. I just have not know this. Good priest learn 'till death
> (hu
On Sun, Dec 21, 2003 at 08:36:38PM +, Colin Watson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> dpkg -l \*
>
> It's been like this ever since I started using Debian, IIRC.
Uh-oh. I just have not know this. Good priest learn 'till death
(hungarian sentence). I just bow in front of you Colin, you make an
exc
On Sun, Dec 21, 2003 at 02:56:10PM -0500, Rick Pasotto wrote:
> When I do 'dpkg -l' now all I get back are installed packages. I used
> to have to grep for an initial 'i' to get just those. How do I see *all*
> available packages?
dpkg -l \*
It's been like this ever since I started using Debian
On Sun, Dec 21, 2003 at 02:56:10PM -0500, Rick Pasotto <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> When I do 'dpkg -l' now all I get back are installed packages. I used
> to have to grep for an initial 'i' to get just those. How do I see *all*
> available packages?
Hmmm. It's not that easy, but you can check the
On 21 Dec 2003 at 14:56, Rick Pasotto wrote:
> When I do 'dpkg -l' now all I get back are installed packages. I used
> to have to grep for an initial 'i' to get just those. How do I see
> *all* available packages?
Are you looking for something in particular? If so "apt-cache search
" is your fr
When I do 'dpkg -l' now all I get back are installed packages. I used
to have to grep for an initial 'i' to get just those. How do I see *all*
available packages?
--
"If you will not fight for right when you can easily win without blood
shed; if you will not fight when your victory is sure and n
32 matches
Mail list logo
