Re: Aptitude wish list item
On Wed, Mar 17, 2010 at 14:15:53 +0100, Wolodja Wentland wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 17, 2010 at 13:44 +0100, Florian Kulzer wrote:
> > On Wed, Mar 17, 2010 at 09:47:55 +0100, Wolodja Wentland wrote:
>
> >> Nobody will manually verify each package that is going to be installed.
>
> > apt-listbugs list $(aptitude -F%p search '~U')
>
> Thanks for the aptitude-fu, but I don't think that I'll do that every
> time before I'll upgrade some packages. It also seems as if it is not
> possible to put these packages on hold *from within apt-listbugs*.
Side note: I would use "forbid-version" rather than "hold" to only block
upgrades to the specific buggy versions. As you point out yourself
below, it is trivial to automate something like this if one wants to do
so.
> I know that this is easily solved with a little more aptitude-fu, but
> still ... what's wrong with execting apt-listbugs *before* any package
> is downloaded?
I do not think anything is wrong with that and I did not mean to argue
against this proposed change.
> I think that the proposed change in apt-listbugs is valid and would
> endorse it as the effect will be the same, with the important difference
> that it saves time, bandwith, money and results in less downloads from
> the mirrors.
My only intention was to point out (what I think is) a reasonably
convenient workaround for the present bandwidth-wasting behavior.
--
Regards, |
Florian |
Reply to: