Re: apt-get doesn't upgrade, but synaptic does

[Frank McCormick <debianlist@videotron.ca>]

On 10/04/14 04:56 PM, Patrick Bartek wrote:
> On Thu, 10 Apr 2014, Frank McCormick wrote:
>
> > On 10/04/14 11:50 AM, Patrick Bartek wrote:
> > > On Thu, 10 Apr 2014, Frank McCormick wrote:
> > >
> > > > Had a strange problem this morning for the second time recently:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > root@frank-debian:/home/frank# apt-get upgrade
> > > > Reading package lists... Done
> > > > Building dependency tree
> > > > Reading state information... Done
> > > > Calculating upgrade... Done
> > > > The following package was automatically installed and is no longer
> > > > required: python-gtksourceview2
> > > > Use 'apt-get autoremove' to remove it.
> > > > The following packages have been kept back:
> > > >      eom-common mate-panel mate-panel-common
> > > > The following packages will be upgraded:
> > > >      base-passwd cups cups-bsd cups-client cups-common
> > > > cups-core-drivers cups-daemon
> > > >      cups-ppdc cups-server-common dnsmasq-base geoip-database
> > > > libcups2 libcupscgi1
> > > >      libcupsimage2 libcupsmime1 libcupsppdc1 man-db pluma
> > > > pluma-common ruby 20 upgraded, 0 newly installed, 0 to remove and
> > > > 3 not upgraded. Need to get 7,645 kB of archives.
> > > > After this operation, 4,731 kB disk space will be freed.
> > > > Do you want to continue? [Y/n]
> > > >
> > > > Apt-get then did what it said it would upgrading everything except
> > > > mate-panel, mate-panel-commong and eom
> > >
> > > This is the proper behavior for "upgrade."  To "upgrade" the
> > > held-back files use "dist-upgrade" instead. The apt-get man explains
> > > the difference between the two, and why it is done that way.
> > >
> > >
> > > B
> >
> >
> >      As I told another poster here, dist-upgrade wanted to remove half
> > of Mate.
>
> Dist-upgrade installs the NEWER version of a file(s) and its
> dependencies, and removes the OLD version.  That is, v1.0 to v2.0.
> Upgrade does v1.0 to v1.1 as well a security and bug fixes.  Check the
> versions of what was going to be installed against what was initially
> installed. Also, check the held-back files against what
> dist-upgrade would have installed.  Any match up namewise?
>
> I admit apt-get and aptitude can be a pain to use sometimes.  That's
> why someone created Synaptic. ;-)
>
> > Synaptic was the only one that offered to replace the old
> > mate-applets file with the new one, Neither apt-get, nor aptitude in
> > any of my attempts mentioned anything about the applets file.
>
> Did you try "upgrading" those old mate-applets specifically by name?
> What were the version numbers of the old and new applets?  If they
> differed by major version numbers, upgrade won't upgrade them.  That's
> not what it does.
>
> B

   Well I wasn't aware of them at the time.

But synaptic was. This is from the apt log.

Start-Date: 2014-04-10  11:00:36
Commandline: synaptic
Install: libmate-panel-applet-4-1:i386 (1.8.0+dfsg1-1, automatic)
Upgrade: mate-panel:i386 (1.6.0-2.1+8.jessie, 1.8.0+dfsg1-1), 
mate-panel-common:i386 (1.6.0-2.1+8.jessie, 1.8.0+dfsg1-1)
Remove: libmatepanelapplet:i386 (1.6.0-2.1+8.jessie)
End-Date: 2014-04-10  11:00:51

It may have been because of the difference in names...the new one
has -4-1 at the end...the old one is just called libmatepanelapplet.

But if synaptic knew about it...why didn't aptitude or apt-get ?

I ran aptitude with full-upgrade and apt-get with dist-upgrade,
but hit 'N' when they wanted to pull out half of Mate. So I don't have
a record of what they proposed as it was not logged.



--
When the rich get richer they get more powerful
and that puts them in the position to lobby for policies
to make them even richer.
- former Clinton advisor Larry Summers