On Thursday, 22 December 2022 09:16:50 CET Martin Steigerwald wrote: > > I find it way easier to have apt reduce the problem riskless first. > > It's a shorter list of actions to review. > > Good argument. My argument is that in the usual situation trying "apt > full-upgrade" first will save me one command. With "apt upgrade" I often > enough would have to use "apt full-upgrade" afterwards. IMO that indicates that the 'state' of your packages could be improved. I *rarely* have to do a full-upgrade to get things fully upgraded. And when not all packages get upgraded, that usually means something 'special' is going on, like now with the Qt transition. On Wednesday, 21 December 2022 11:42:17 CET Diederik de Haas wrote: > I think they above quoted script is absolutely horrific. I made that statement for 2 reasons: 1) It tries do a dist-upgrade 'at all cost' (imo ofc) 2) `dpkg --set-selection` completely messes up APT's 'database' wrt manually and automatically installed packages ... which in turn causes the need to full-/dist-upgrade. Run the following command and mark as automatically installed all those you don't need to have marked as manually installed: $ aptitude search '?narrow(~i!~M~n^lib,!~essential!~prequired)' That command finds all packages which are marked as manually installed, have a name which starts with 'lib' and are not of priority essential or required. HTH
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.