Re: Release notes
TL;DR: revised patch removes this paragraph.
Daniel Hartwig wrote:
Justin B Rye <justin.byam.rye@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> The preferred program for interactive package management from a
>>> terminal is _aptitude_. For a non-interactive command line interface
>>> for package management, it is recommended to use _apt-get_. [...]
>
> +The preferred program for extensive interactions with the package
> +management sysyem is <command>aptitude</command> in its full-screen
^t
Oops! Typo...
> +<quote>visual</quote> mode. For individual package management actions,
> +it is recommended to use <command>apt-get</command> on the command line.
>
> This distinction has nothing to do with visual mode of aptitude, the
> command line interface provides similar levels of interaction.
You really think so? I'm surprised, because my experience is entirely
different: I find using aptitude's full-screen mode fundamentally
different from its CLI in a way that makes it much more effective in
managing complex sets of dependencies. And I was assuming this was a
matter of general consensus, since after all it's what this document
has been (rather clumsily) advising everybody for years.
> The
> original wording more elegantly captures the essence of the
> distinction, for the reasons Steve mentions, including the problems
> with with e.g. “individual package management actions”.
If anybody so far has presented a reason for preferring the existing
text, I haven't seen it. Steve's reference to "individual package
management actions" was just a misunderstanding: as I've already
pointed out, the reason that sentence doesn't cover "apt-get
dist-upgrade" is that it was never supposed to - that's the topic
covered by the immediately following sentence.
> There is no pressing need to modify this section. It is not a source
> of widespread confusion.
I've shown evidence that it's a source of *some* amount of confusion.
Even if it's an amount you don't care about, you aren't the one who's
being asked to do the work of producing patches. I'm happy to do
that!
I intend as usual to do a proofreading sweep of the whole Wheezy
Release Notes, fixing even the trivial typos. Probably to you it
looks like tedious nitpicking, just as to me a lot of programming work
looks like tedious nitpicking. Is this a good reason for fighting to
keep my contributions out of Debian?
> Neither is this something new, so why not just remove this old
> notice?
Yes, sure, that would be an option. I attach a version of my patch
that removes this particular paragraph from whats-new.dbk; let's see
if this gets us anywhere.
--
JBR with qualifications in linguistics, experience as a Debian
sysadmin, and probably no clue about this particular package
Index: whats-new.dbk
===================================================================
--- whats-new.dbk (revision 9722)
+++ whats-new.dbk (working copy)
@@ -433,17 +433,6 @@
</para>
</section>
-<!-- FIXME: REVIEW for wheezy -->
-<section id="pkgmgmt">
-<title>Package management</title>
-<para>
-The preferred program for interactive package management from a terminal is
-<command>aptitude</command>. For a non-interactive command line interface
-for package management, it is recommended to use <command>apt-get</command>.
-<command>apt-get</command> is also the preferred tool for upgrades
-between major releases.
-</para>
-
<programlisting condition="fixme">
TODO: Do we have to mention dpkg triggers here or elsewhere?
</programlisting>
Index: upgrading.dbk
===================================================================
--- upgrading.dbk (revision 9722)
+++ upgrading.dbk (working copy)
@@ -300,7 +300,8 @@
linkend="old-sources"/>.
</para>
<para>
-To perform this review, launch <command>aptitude</command> in <quote>visual mode</quote> and
+To perform this review, launch <command>aptitude</command> in its
+full-screen <quote>visual mode</quote> and
press <keycap>g</keycap> (<quote>Go</quote>). If it shows any actions, you should review them and either fix
them or implement the suggested actions. If no actions are suggested you will
be presented with a message saying <quote>No packages are scheduled to be installed,
@@ -718,32 +719,46 @@
<listitem>
<para>
Remove forgotten packages. If you have
-<systemitem role="package">popularity-contest</systemitem> installed, you can use
-<command>popcon-largest-unused</command> to list the packages you do not use
-that occupy the most space. You can also use
-<command>deborphan</command> or <command>debfoster</command> to find obsolete
-packages (see <xref linkend="obsolete"/> ). Alternatively you can start
-<command>aptitude</command> in <quote>visual mode</quote> and find obsolete packages under
-<quote>Obsolete and Locally Created Packages</quote>.
+used <command>aptitude</command> or <command>apt-get</command> to manually
+install packages in &oldreleasename; it will have kept track of those packages
+you manually installed, and will be able to mark as redundant those packages
+pulled in by dependencies alone which are no longer needed due to a package being
+removed. They will not mark for removal packages that you manually installed. To
+remove automatically installed packages that are no longer used, run:
</para>
+<screen>
+# apt-get autoremove
+</screen>
+<para>
+You can also use <command>deborphan</command>,
+<command>debfoster</command>, or <command>cruft</command> to find redundant
+packages. In default mode, <command>deborphan</command> will only report
+redundant libraries: packages in the <quote><literal>libs</literal></quote> or
+<quote><literal>oldlibs</literal></quote> sections that are not used by any
+other packages. Do not blindly remove the packages these tools present,
+especially if you are using aggressive non-default options that are prone to
+false positives. It is highly recommended that you manually review the
+packages suggested for removal (i.e. their contents, sizes, and descriptions)
+before you remove them.
+</para>
</listitem>
<listitem>
<para>
Remove packages that take up too much space and are not currently
-needed (you
-can always reinstall them after the upgrade). You can list the packages that
-take up the most disk space with <command>dpigs</command> (available in the
-<systemitem role="package">debian-goodies</systemitem> package) or with
-<command>wajig</command> (running <literal>wajig size</literal>).
-</para>
-<para>
-You can list packages that take up most of the disk space with
-<systemitem role="package">aptitude</systemitem>. Start
-<command>aptitude</command> in <quote>visual mode</quote>,
+needed (you can always reinstall them after the upgrade). If you have
+<systemitem role="package">popularity-contest</systemitem> installed,
+you can use <command>popcon-largest-unused</command> to list the
+packages you do not use that occupy the most space. You can find the
+packages that just take up the most disk space with <command>dpigs</command>
+(available in the <systemitem role="package">debian-goodies</systemitem>
+package) or with <command>wajig</command> (running <literal>wajig
+size</literal>). They can also be found with <systemitem
+role="package">aptitude</systemitem>. Start <command>aptitude</command> in
+its full-screen <quote>visual mode</quote>,
select <menuchoice><guimenu>Views</guimenu><guimenuitem>New Flat Package
List</guimenuitem></menuchoice>, press <keycap>l</keycap> and enter
-<literal>~i</literal>, press <keycap>S</keycap> and enter
-<literal>~installsize</literal>, then it will give you nice list to work
+<literal>~i</literal>, then press <keycap>S</keycap> and enter
+<literal>~installsize</literal>. This will give you handy list to work
with.
</para>
</listitem>
@@ -1907,7 +1922,8 @@
<itemizedlist>
<listitem>
<para>
-Remove obsolete and unused packages as described in <xref linkend="obsolete"/>.
+Remove newly redundant or obsolete packages as described in
+<xref linkend="sufficient-space"/> and <xref linkend="obsolete"/>.
You should review which configuration files they use and consider purging
the packages to remove their configuration files.
</para>
@@ -1966,32 +1982,6 @@
<quote>Obsolete and Locally Created Packages</quote> entry.
</para>
<para>
-Also, if you have used <command>aptitude</command> or
-<command>apt-get</command> to manually install packages in &oldreleasename;
-it will have kept track of those packages you manually installed and will be
-able to mark as obsolete those packages pulled in by dependencies alone which
-are no longer needed if a package has been removed.
-<command>aptitude</command> and <systemitem role="package">apt</systemitem>,
-unlike <command>deborphan</command>, will not mark for removal packages that
-you manually installed, as opposed to those that were automatically
-installed through dependencies. To remove automatically installed packages
-that are no longer used, run:
-</para>
-<screen>
-# apt-get autoremove
-</screen>
-<para>
-There are additional tools you can use to find obsolete packages such as
-<command>deborphan</command>, <command>debfoster</command> or
-<command>cruft</command>. <command>deborphan</command> is highly recommended,
-although it will (in default mode) only report obsolete libraries: packages in
-the <quote><literal>libs</literal></quote> or <quote><literal>oldlibs</literal></quote> sections that are not used by any other packages. Do not
-blindly remove the packages these tools present, especially if you are using
-aggressive non-default options that are prone to produce false positives. It
-is highly recommended that you manually review the packages suggested for
-removal (i.e. their contents, size and description) before you remove them.
-</para>
-<para>
The <ulink url="&url-bts;">Debian Bug Tracking System</ulink>
often provides additional information on why the package was removed. You
should review both the archived bug reports for the package itself and the
@@ -2149,7 +2139,7 @@
to improve system maintainability. To ease the upgrade path in such cases,
&releasename; often provides <quote>dummy</quote> packages: empty packages that have the same name as
the old package in &oldreleasename; with dependencies that cause the new packages to be
-installed. These <quote>dummy</quote> packages are considered obsolete packages after the
+installed. These <quote>dummy</quote> packages are considered redundant after the
upgrade and can be safely removed.
</para>
<para>
Reply to: