Re: Aptitude erroneously thinks many packages are unused and wants to remove them.
Christian Pernegger wrote:
>>>Even if there's a third, neutral, unmarked state - it's still a
>>>problem in my eyes when users switch from dselect to aptitude.
>>
>>It's not a problem if you tell aptitude what to do when you start using it.
>
>
> How would I do that? Even if I wanted to go through all packages and
> mark them, how would I tell "manually installed with aptitude, will
> not touch" from "installed with whatever, treating as auto-installed"?
Do you need to tell the difference? All you need to do is when you
press 'g' and notice removal of packages that were installed by other
means, hit '+'. This is documented further in other posts in this
thread, afaik.
>>In addition, if you think there is a bug in aptitude, please file a bug report.
>
>
> Considering all the bug reports already filed on this or related
> issues I think I'll wait for them to be fixed and then try aptitude
> again. Examples:
>
> #299009: aptitude: Different package status results from command line
> vs. interactive use
> #316027: aptitude: "upgrade" didn't work with unfullfilled dependencies
> #164869: aptitude should be less aggressive about upgrading
> #200415: aptitude: dependencies are not handled well when upgrading
>
> as well as various other reports about aptitude not playing well with
> / ignoring state changes made by other package manager frontends.
>
> Although aptitude incorporates some great features, especially marking
> packages installed only because they were depended upon, I have purged
> it for now. I really can't say it's safe to use.
Only you can make that decision. You merely need to give it some
direction when you start using it. I have never had it remove something
that I didn't want removed.
Antony
Reply to: