Re: Silence apt-get for real
Andrey Andreev wrote:
>Radu Brumariu wrote:
>
>
>>Andrey Andreev wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Radu Brumariu wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>Andrey Andreev wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>------------------
>>>>>>Configuration file `/etc/qmail/tcp.smtp'
>>>>>>==> Modified (by you or by a script) since installation.
>>>>>>==> Package distributor has shipped an updated version.
>>>>>> What would you like to do about it ? Your options are:
>>>>>> Y or I : install the package maintainer's version
>>>>>> N or O : keep your currently-installed version
>>>>>> D : show the differences between the versions
>>>>>> Z : background this process to examine the situation
>>>>>>The default action is to keep your current version.
>>>>>>*** tcp.smtp (Y/I/N/O/D/Z) [default=N] ? n
>>>>>>------------------
>>>>>>
>>>>>>How can I get rid of this warning ? - I want apt-get to be completely
>>>>>>silent. I know that this could be dangerous - but in my case it is ok
>>>>>>given that it is me that control the repository and that I have tested
>>>>>>all the packages before putting them there.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>So to put it short how do I silence apt-get completely ?.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>Check the yes command.
>>>>>
>>>>>You probably want something like
>>>>>
>>>>>yes | apt-get upgrade -youroptionshere
>>>>>
>>>>>or
>>>>>
>>>>>yes N | apt-get upgrade -youroptionshere
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>apt-get has alread a switch just for that : apt-get -y upgrade . RTFM.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>And -y does not cover all warnings, as you would see if you RTFM
>>>yourself. Next time try to answer the question.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>From TFM :
>>
>> -y, --yes, --assume-yes,
>> Automatic yes to prompts; assume "yes" as answer to all
>>prompts
>> and run non-interactively
>>
>>all prompts, except held packages or removing essential packages , in
>>which case --force-yes should help.
>>The question was on how to get rid of the messages that ask about the
>>configuration file changes. -y does help in that direction.
>>
>>
>>
>
>Once again - read the original question. The OP _knows_ about -y and
>--force-yes. He uses them. See? They *did not* rid him of questions
>about config files. The OP states that very clearly. That is the point
>of the question. Geddit? Now that we both understand the problem, you
>should be able to see why using yes was needed.
>
>Furthermore, please refrain from showing off whatever knowledge you have
>about apt-get, and sending people to RTFM, without trying to help or
>ever understanding the problem.
>
>Andro
>
>
>
Yes, you're right, he was using those switches . It was my mistake and I
apologize . Perhaps I'm the one who should RTFM.
--
"Stat rosa pristina nomine, nomina nuda tenemus"
Reply to: