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

Re: Default Debian install harassed me

On Tue, 8 Oct 2019 21:40:08 +0300
Reco <recoverym4n@enotuniq.net> wrote:

> On Tue, Oct 08, 2019 at 11:21:26AM -0700, Patrick Bartek wrote:
> > On Mon, 07 Oct 2019 12:44:32 -0500
> > John Hasler <jhasler@newsguy.com> wrote:
> >   
> > > Patrick Bartek writes:  
> > > > They are each their own Hell.  Package management software solved,
> > > > more or less, one type, but created another beast as the OP has
> > > > discovered and that we each deal with in our own ways.  Such is life
> > > > . . . and software    
> > > 
> > > The OP is in a hell of his own making (which is fine with me).  If he
> > > wasn't such a dork he'd let Lxqt pull in Xarchiver, ignore it, and
> > > install his choice of archiver.  
> >   
> ...
> > Unfortunately, it's the way dependencies have been implemented.  
> In this particular case, it's the way a metapackage have been
> implemented.
> Dependencies by themselves are fine, but their usage in this case
> (Depends instead of Recommends) is controversial.
> In another words, do not blame the mechanism, blame the policy.

That was what I was implying.  That's why I used "implemented" instead
of blaming dependencies directly.  And, yes, metapackages can result in
getting more installed than expected.  I try to avoid using them.

> > One should be able to uninstall one thing without it trashing your whole
> > system because of dependencies, Recommends, etc.  
> It's possible already, although it contradicts the purpose of
> metapackages. First, you remove lxqt. Next, you apt-mark to manual all
> its Depends and Recommends. Finally, you remove what you do not want.
> And note, I did not imply that it's user-friendly in any way. And I
> won't call it "simple" or "obvious".

To say the least.  And beyond the OP's capabilities.
> > There should be a special switch: "uninstall only this, leave
> > everything else, don't automatically install a replacement -- I'll do
> > that." :)  
> There is no need for such switch as it's perfectly doable with stock apt
> & dpkg. But since it falls into "creative Debian breakage" category, I
> won't go into the details here.

I'm familiar with the method and have used it in a limited way,
but it's so easy to break the system without thorough research first.
And, again, beyond the OP's skill set . . . and temperament.

> > > I really don't see anything I'd call "dependency hell" any more.
> > > Perhaps it's because I experienced the real thing, or perhaps because I
> > > don't use a DE.  
> > 
> > Try unistalling a DE, either in part or whole, to replace it with
> > another and you'll end up with no xorg and all the stuff that goes with
> > it, and all the apps that run under it. Quite a surprise.  
> My experience tells me otherwise, but I know how to use apt-mark.

The last time I tried unistalling a DE was 8 years ago.  Found no
solution that wouldn't break or wipe out the system.  I don't even think
apt-mark existed then. Decided it was easier to do a clean install with
the DE I wanted.  There wasn't enough room on the little 4GB SSD on an
Asus eeePC 900 to install two.

> > Dependency/Recommends have gotten to the point now of
> > unnecessarily bloating a system with apps and utilities that
> > aren't needed, not wanted, and will never be used.  
> Some examples would be nice here.

OK.  Install any DE and you'll likely get Firefox-ESR, Libreoffice,
all kinds of multimedia apps and utilities, etc., etc.  Even just
installing the basic DE components instead of using the metapackage
will still get apps that perhaps you don't want like audacious which I
never use, but with almost anything sound related you install you get
it unless you want to use dpkg and resolve the dependencies yourself
which I have done: Used Slackware for years. ;-)  And "marking" certain
items individually not to be installed can be a lot of work, probably
more than it's worth.  I just ignore them.  Plenty of hard drive space

> > That's why I begin all my installs with a terminal-only system and
> > build it up piece by piece judiciously checking what gets installed.
> > The result is a small,  
> uname -m && du -sxh /usr

On this my primary system?  Stretch amd64. /usr 4.0GB.  20GB / (31%
in use of which /usr is a part). /home and swap on separate partitions.
However, I've been using it for almost 2 years and have apps like video
editing software installed I'm testing. So, /usr has more on it than

I've done installs using the method mentioned above where the whole
system was on a 4.0GB SSD and install only took 1.2GB including
customized LXDE desktop and applications.  No swap.

> > fast, efficient set up with only what I want -- for the most part.  
> And that "part" that mars your perfect installation is?

Little things that I don't use, but apps complain about if they
aren't installed like xarchiver.


Reply to: