Re: Non-understood advice - was Re: dist-upgrade from sarge to etch - package
- To: email@example.com
- Subject: Re: Non-understood advice - was Re: dist-upgrade from sarge to etch - package
- From: Daniel Burrows <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Date: Wed, 06 Feb 2008 19:06:27 -0800
- Message-id: <20080207030627.GA13328@alpaca>
- In-reply-to: <20080206215348.GA10862@pc0197>
- References: <20080204180815.GB25142@pc0197> <email@example.com> <20080205175408.GA2054@pc0197> <firstname.lastname@example.org> <20080206215348.GA10862@pc0197>
On Wed, Feb 06, 2008 at 10:53:48PM +0100, Florian Kulzer <email@example.com> was heard to say:
> On Wed, Feb 06, 2008 at 20:34:14 +0000, Felix Karpfen wrote:
> > On Tue, 05 Feb 2008 18:54:08 +0100, Florian Kulzer wrote:
> > > Check for non-Debian packages on your system by running:
> > >
> > > aptitude search '~i!~Odebian'
> > As an aptitude-novice, I tried the above command on my
> > fully-operational upgrade from Sarge to Etch. It gave a long list of
> > installed packages - almost all of which were part of the Debian
> > install.
> What does your sources.list look like? I could understand this behavior
> if you had non-Debian archives included that provide packages with the
> same names as official packages. (The backports archive would be an
> example.) The above search term matches any packet that is installed and
> that has a non-Debian version in one of the archives known by apt; this
> non-Debian version does not have to be the one that is actually
> installed. If you want to avoid this ambiguity then you have to add the
> version narrowing operator:
Packages that are obsolete are IIRC considered to have no origin,
because they aren't included in any known package archive. You could
try searching for '~i!~Odebian!~o instead, maybe.
> > The generated list included one of the two non-Debian packages (opera)-
> > deleted during the install and replaced subsequently. It failed to find
> > the only other non-Debian package (vuescan).
> How did you install vuescan? Maybe it does not properly identify itself
> as non-Debian.
Any package that isn't in an archive with Origin: Debian will be
matched by that expression; whoever provides the vuescan package would
have had to go out of their way to label their archive as being a Debian
archive in order for this to happen. "apt-cache policy vuescan" and/or
"apt-cache showpkg vuescan" might give a hint about what's happening.