[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Question about command-line aptitude 0.2.11.1



On Wed, 2003-06-11 at 20:36, Joey Hess wrote:
> Ron Johnson wrote:
> > This is on a mixed sarge/sid system.
> > 
> > ~# aptitude install base-config
> > Reading Package Lists... Done
> > Building Dependency Tree
> > Reading extended state information... Done
> > The following packages are unused and will be REMOVED:
> >   bluefish gaim gedit gnome-spell libgtkspell0 logjam pan
> > [snip]
> > The following packages will be upgraded:
> >   base-config
> > 1 packages upgraded, 0 newly installed, 7 to remove and 43 not upgraded.
> > Need to get 126kB of archives. After unpacking 12.6MB will be freed.
> > Do you want to continue? [Y/n/e/d/v/action/?] n
> > Abort.
> > 
> > Why does aptitude want to remove those packages?  For example,
> > pan (which I installed from sid) is installed correctly.
> > 
> > # dpkg -l |grep ' pan '
> > ii  pan   0.14.0-3 A Newsreader based on GTK2, which looks like
> 
> These packages were pulled in by dependencies of other packages, and so
> aptitude has them marked as auto-installed, and so will try to
> auto-remove them. 
> 
> Use "aptitude unmarkauto pan gaim <etc>" (or the GUI) to let it know you
> mean to keep the packages.

Thanks.

However, one thing puzzles me: bluefish, gaim, gedit, logjam & pan
are "terminal" packages.  I.e., nothing depends on them.

What happened is that they depend on gnome-spell, so when I
removed it, these other packages were also removed.

Is that a bug in aptitude?

Ron
-- 
+-----------------------------------------------------------+
| Ron Johnson, Jr.     Home: ron.l.johnson@cox.net          |
| Jefferson, LA  USA   http://members.cox.net/ron.l.johnson |
|                                                           |
| Regarding war zones: "There's nothing sacrosanct about a  |
| hotel with a bunch of journalists in it."                 |
|     Marine Lt. Gen. Bernard E. Trainor (Retired)          |
+-----------------------------------------------------------+



Reply to: