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

Re: What is /var/apt/cache good for ? (and other Sid dist-upgrade riddles)

On 09/15/2017 06:02 AM, Thomas Schmitt wrote:

i ran
   apt-get update
   apt-get dist-ugrade
on my Sid VM, one year after the last such run.

It announced to need 1.2 GB more of disk space, which is astounding on its own,
but in the end it consumed 2.4 GB.
When looking for the reason of the waste i got to nearly 5 GB of

Before i run apt-get commands from the web like "clean" or "autoclean",
i'd like to know for what use case Debian keeps this wealth of .deb files.
The internet mainly has the story that it grows a lot, for the purpose
of re-installing installed packages. Is that a valid use case ?

On my Jessie it is 2.4 GB. But she has 2.5 TB of disk, not 32 GB like Sid.


Further i could need hints how to find out why dist-upgrade intentionally
inflated the installed Sid by 1.2 GB of installed package content.

What in a Sid of less than 10 GB useful size can grow that much during a
single year ?


Riddle about find test -ctime:

   find /var/cache -ctime 1 -exec ls -l '{}' ';'

finds nothing rather than the files which were created or chmodded since
yesterday, whereas

   ls -ltcR /var/cache 2>&1 | grep 'Sep 15'

finds 1811 files of 1.2 GB total size.
find -mtime seems to work, but is not what i would need for finding new
files installed by apt-get.

Yes, you are correct and a few days ago a Sid install was using less space than Stretch, why I don't know, but now it has both qt4 and qt5 with more to come and who knows what else, it's early in the game. Maybe run gtkorphan or deborphan or upgrade-system, on Sid/Testing be careful with upgrade-system it will do a dist-upgrade, but with any of those you can remove orphan packages.

On Sid it does not work with self-made files in $HOME either.

On my Jessie, find -ctime seems to work ok.


Have a nice day :)

Jimmy Johnson

Ubuntu 14.04 LTS - KDE 4.13.2 - AMD A8-7600 - EXT4 at sda1
Registered Linux User #380263

Reply to: