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

Re: how to put packages on hold -- permanently

El mié, 30-12-2009 a las 21:46 +0100, Javier Barroso escribió:
> Hi,
> On Wed, Dec 30, 2009 at 8:41 PM, Consultores Agropecuarios
> <consultores1@gmail.com> wrote:
> > El mié, 30-12-2009 a las 00:20 +0100, Robert David escribió:
> >> Did you consider using aptitude as your main package manager?? It will solve
> >> these problems easily. I just hold packages that I need to be hold and
> >> aptitude works great.
> >>
> >> I dont understand why so many people today use pure apt-get for everyday
> >> package management.
> >>
> >> Robert.
> >
> > I prefer apt-get and dselect, because they are simply clear. As example,
> > aptitude used the command # aptitude upgrade, but now it is aptitude
> > safe-upgrade; it is absolutely absurd, because the word "safe" can have
> > any meaning except safe! if i use safe-upgrade, it installs buggy
> > packages, then where is the safe-upgrade?

> safe-upgrade == aptitude won't install any new package, only will
> upgrade your packages to newer versions when it won't require
> installing new dependencies, which are less buggy generally than
> older.

You are having troubles with "generally", which include by itself that
something "buggy" could go on it. And, again with "i prefer", it means,
"i have chosen", then i am not asking for your opinion or viewpoint!

> aptitude curses interface help you when you have many versions of the
> same package to choose the version and its deppends. Browsing packages
> there, is a great feature , you can sort packages with any criterion.
> You can also browse between various solutions if no one is the frankly
> winner.
> With aptitude you can search even by maintainer, upgradable packages
> or many other criteria [1]
> >
> > Another example is when i use apt-buglist or something similar; aptitude
> > offers me many unclear options, and the most options offered are totally
> > unclear.
> Reporting whishlist level bugs about that 'unclear' options could help
> to improve these options descriptions

Yes, but for the people who are interested on it; i am not one of them!

> [1] http://algebraicthunk.net/~dburrows/projects/aptitude/doc/en/ch02s03s05.html
> PD: Of course you can play minesweeper too :) :
> http://algebraicthunk.net/~dburrows/projects/aptitude/doc/en/ch02s05.html

I could not know, what part of the text should be eliminated.

Reply to: