Re: package upgrading issue
Hi,
I had the same problem. I wanted to get a package
from the FTP site that was not on my CD and did not
know how to make dselect load just the package I
was interested in. I tried to unselect everything
from the topmost section, but it did not work. I
read in one of the help files that any operation
on a section title would effect all packages in the
section, but that did not happen. I read that
dpkg-ftp was used by dselect but I could not invoke
this from the shell. Attempts to put packages on
hold (my understanding was this would prevent it
from upgrading) was not easy and I kept getting
into dependencies and conflicts. I eventually gave
up and let dselect use its defaults and upgrade
all the packages.
I am a new user and I probably do not know how to
upgrade/get a new package using dselect. I prefer
not using dpkg; I prefer something graphical and
easy to use. Also, is there a way in dselect to
move the cursor to the next/previous section? And
is there a way to affect an entire section?
Thanks.
deepak
---tjm1@thorn.net wrote:
>
> I am sure that is some ways this problem is the result of my own
inexperience, or that it may in fact
> already be addressed in the successor to dselect. However, I feel I
should mention it in any case.
> Using dselect I ftped in wanting to get an upgraded package list
for potato. ( most of my system is stable)
> I prefer to at least look at the packages in dselect because it will
inform me of any required dependences even
> if I don't actually install that way. The problem is this. When
upgrading the package list dselect marks
> everything that was installed as install. For example if I have
bc100.0001.deb installed
> and potato has a bc100.0002 available this new file is marked for
installation. What this means is that dselect
> and the dpkg database thinks I want to upgrade hundreds of megs of
packages. Dselect is assuming that since I
> installed the previous version I must want to upgrade to the new
version. This is obviously not tru for all
> applications. It also completly undermines dselects abilty to
inform me of package dependences.
>
> My efforts to fix this problem have dug me deeper into the hole and
now I will probably be forced to do a
> complete reinstall. I think it would me far better for deslect or
the new package installation tool to mark
> the newer packages as 'upgradeable' rather than assuming I want to
install hundreds of megs.
>
> Thanks you,
>
> Tom
>
>
> --
> Unsubscribe? mail -s unsubscribe
debian-user-request@lists.debian.org < /dev/null
>
>
_________________________________________________________
DO YOU YAHOO!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
Reply to: