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

Re: update messages

On Thu, Dec 28, 2006 at 01:02:25PM -0800, Andrew Sackville-West wrote:
> as you know, running apt-get and aptitude can cause a database to get
> out of sync...

Actually I have only recently become aware of this. I had previously
just thought of aptitude as a menu based front end for apt, so I
tended to use 'apt-get install' when I knew exactly what I wanted,
and 'aptitude' when I needed to browse or couldn't remember the
command to do something :-/

> but your plan is not without merit. If you have
> previously used aptitude exclusively, you can do the same thing as
> above but s/apt-get/aptitude/g.
> aptitude update && aptitude upgrade 
> will give you the same behavior as apt-get...

Ah, thanks. That is worth knowing.

> > to get the easier updates done first, and then if that goes well
> > follow up with a hopefully smaller
> > 	apt-get dist-upgrade 
> > to deal with the remainder in a separate run.
> and then follow up with 
> aptitude dist-upgrade

Is that last line what is needed to get aptitude back into
sync? If not, how is that achieved?

> > Then I can try running aptitude and hopefully it will have stopped
> > crashing and can tell me what else it thinks is left to be done....
> I missed the bit about it crashing. what's happening?

It only started happening after I had tried an 'apt-get install aptitude'
to upgrade to the latest version (and co-incidentally after I had done
the 'apt-get install' of the pgp keyring - so I am not certain which
was responsible).

What happens now is that after any attempt to issue a 'u' command in
aptitude, I get an abort leaving me back in the command line (with a
garbled display) and the error message:
 aptitude: symbol lookup error: aptitude: undefined symbol: _ZN9pkgPolicyD2Ev

> > One of the things that bothered me about what aptitude wanted to do
> > was that it included several packages it threatened to remove because
> > they were 'no longer used'. I don't know how it decided this, as the
> > list included packages like 'xv' and 'xearth' which I explicitly
> > installed and definately use quite regularly....
> run aptitude in interactive mode and manually mark those packages:
> aptitude
> then 'u' to update, 'U' to mark for upgrade, then 'g' to see what it
> want to do. scroll through and mark 'm' on those you want to keep,
> which should mark them as manually installed. you may need to '+'
> them as well, to keep them around. I have not been using aptitude long
> (having used apt-get exclusively before), but am learning that you can
> actually get it to do what *you* want with a little fiddling. Then it
> will generally respect what you want...

So this behaviour could be the result of my having installed some
applications using 'apt-get install' rather than aptitude, leaving
aptitude unaware of them being manual rather than automatic
installs? That would explain things.

Thanks for the advice.

Digby R. S. Tarvin                                          digbyt(at)digbyt.com

Reply to: