Re: apt-get deprecated?
"Monique Y. Mudama" <spam@bounceswoosh.org> writes:
> On 2005-05-01, Paul E Condon penned:
>>
>> In most cases this is good, but it can lead to aptitude doing really
>> bad things in some special situations. For instance, I once
>> installed kde by requesting the single over-all package that exists
>> only to bring in all the packages needed to give the user a standard
>> kde set-up. Then, after using it for a while, I decided that a lot
>> of what was there was stuff and clutter that I didn't want. I tried
>> to remove the stuff that I didn't want, but aptitude wouldn't do it,
>> because it insisted that I had to remove the over-all kde package
>> first. But when I removed that, it threatened to remove _all_ kde
>> packages, which is not what I wanted. I used apt-get to remove the
>> package kde. This made all of kde's component packages into
>> independent packages in the little mind of aptitude. Then I removed
>> the ones that I didn't want without aptitude trashing the rest of my
>> kde set-up.
>
> Ah, yes. I've run into that kind of obnoxiousness before.
>
> I think the "right" thing to do here would be to mark all the
> kde-related packages as being "manually" installed, or at least some
> key subset. AIUI, that will promote them to first-class citizens of
> aptitude-land. But when I ran into the problem, I don't think I knew
> about that.
The right thing to do is to kill the huge meta-packages like 'kde' since
they are an ugly kludge and an abuse of the packaging system.
--
Society is never going to make any progress until we all learn to
pretend to like each other.
Reply to: