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

Re: Apt-get and aptitude man pages

On Sunday 03 July 2005 17:09, R. Clayton <rvclayton@acm.org>
(<[🔎] 87vf3r4hc8.fsf_-_@localhost.localdomain>) wrote:

>   That may be true for apt-get (the apt-get man page entries for upgrade
>   and dist-upgrade mention nothing about installation state), but it
>   doesn't seem to be true for aptitude [...]

It is true.

>   [...] where the man page suggests that 
>   upgrade may change an unused package state from installed to
>   not-installed:
>     Installed packages will not be removed unless they are unused

Today's update (July 3) has two new packages, libjack0.100.0-{0,dev}.  These
conflict with libjack0.80.0-dev.  If I execute 'aptitude upgrade', the new
libjack packages are not installed and the existing packages are not
removed.  If I execute 'aptitude dist-upgrade', the opposite is true.

These existing packages are described by aptitude as "unused" but actually
the "dev" packages are in conflict.  Does "unused" mean the same thing as
"conflict"?  I think there's an overgeneralization of the word "unused".

Reply to: