Re: packages listed vs. apt-rdepends --follow=Depends ...
On 12/2/23, Albretch Mueller <lbrtchx@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 12/2/23, Tom Furie <tom@furie.org.uk> wrote:
>> 'apt depends <package>' would list the direct dependencies without
>> recursion.
> $ apt depends wget 2>&1 | grep " Depends: " | awk '{ print $2}'
that didn't work, dpkg would still demand dependencies, so I decided
to change the strategy to:
1) using apt-get install ...
2) save the install log into a file (apt-get install reports to you
the order of installation) from which you can then created a dpkg
based script
3) move all packages from /var/cache/ ... to wherever is needed.
~
On 12/2/23, Darac Marjal <mailinglist@darac.org.uk> wrote:
> There used to be "apt-zip" (no longer in Debian), which was
> built around the idea of using ZIP disks for transferring files.
> "apt-zip-list" would use the state of packages on the disconnected
> system to product a "want list" of files to be downloaded. This "want
> list" would be a shell script consisting of various wget or curl
> commands. The script would be taken over to the connected system and
> run, to pull the required packages onto a high-capacity removable medium
> (such as a USB drive or ZIP drive). Back at the disconnected system,
> "apt-zip-inst" would complete the process, installing the files from the
> removable medium.
Hmm! ... and the apt-zip functionality doesn't exist anymore in the
same way that it rains and thunders when the Gods decide? When a
package is removed or discontinued, is there a formal explanation as
to why?
I don't know why and I decided to change my approach, but I tried to use the:
https://manpages.ubuntu.com/manpages/noble/en/man8/apt-get.8.html
-s, --simulate, --just-print, --dry-run, --recon, --no-act
functionality, but it didn't work:
"E: Command line option --dry-run is not understood in combination
with the other options"
then I found confusing explanations about users being confused:
https://serverfault.com/questions/1074702/apt-get-update-dry-run-command-does-not-work-anymore
~
On 12/3/23, Greg Wooledge <greg@wooledge.org> wrote:
> After that, it was revealed that the whole project is based on some
> paranoid fantasy. The non-networked computer is non-networked only
> because the OP believes that "they" (that's literally the word which
> was used) are using "AI" to watch the OP "24/7". This makes me less
> inclined to take the project seriously.
Greg, quite honestly, I'd wish it would just be my "paranoid
fantasy", but, unfortunately, I will have disappoint you, with all the
streams of data "they" are collecting from everyone of us, "they" are
keeping a data Doppelgänger of everyone of us.
lbrtchx
Reply to: