Re: potato -> woody upgrade not smooth...
On Wed, Jul 04, 2001 at 02:07:50PM -0300, Gustavo Noronha Silva wrote:
> Em Wed, 4 Jul 2001 16:47:15 +0200
> joost@topaz.mdcc.cx (Joost Kooij) escreveu:
>
> > Next time try dselect. From the dpkg manual page:
> I just don't think apt should act like that... I am able to
> do this installation with apt using a somewhat brute-force
> method (apt-get install xbase-clients xfonts...) but I just
> don't think a good answer to the problem is 'use dselect'...
It does help you to better diagnose things when they are broken. If the
dependencies come out weird, that is a signal to look into it. Voila,
this is what dselect helps you do.
There's no point in saying: "but it is so complicated", because it is not
dselect that is complicated, the dependencies are. If you read what the
'R' and 'Q' keys do, you will no longer be lost and confused. It is that
hard. Terrible.
> apt is meant to be the default package management tool AFAIK
> and even dselect uses it now, so apt should be able to work this
> around
Where does it say that apt is to be the default package management tool?
So many people seem to be convinced that this is a fact, but I cannot
find any dependable source for it.
I assume that the dpkg manual page, the faq and the installation documents
are correct.
> > Please help spread the gospel: "use dselect".
> I'm doing the reverse... I keep spreading that apt is quite
> easier to work with and I don't want to have to use dselect
> to upgrade my system, apt-get update && apt-get dist-upgrade
> should do it, no?
Well, imho you're wrong, and you're telling people to do the wrong thing.
Apt works fine as a method in dselect. It did not replace dselect. It
does not update the dpkg available database. Dselect will.
"dselect update": same amount of typing, more added value.
The dselect-hate is taking on hilarious proportions. People say
that dselect is too hard for them, and then propose silliness, like
"dpkg --get-selections >tmp; vi tmp; dpkg --set-selections <tmp"
Really, vi is much harder to learn than dselect.
> > Shouldn't you have checked beforehand? Use dselect.
> would dselect really do it? I'll try that later but...
Dselect will let you check this, yes. It is one of its main uses.
Cheers,
Joost
Reply to: