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

Re: Synaptic on Debian 11.3 fails to install "kate"



On Wed 07 Dec 2022 at 11:53:23 (-0700), Charles Curley wrote:
> On Thu, 8 Dec 2022 02:08:09 +0800 Bret Busby wrote:
> 
> > … it is my understanding, in 
> > thinking about it further, after I had suggested running apt install, 
> > that the correct, or, recommended procedure, before installing any 
> > additional packages, is to always, first, run apt update, to ensure
> > that the cache is always updated, before attempting to either upgrade
> > the system, or, to install any additional packages, as a standard
> > operating procedure.
> > 
> > Could someone please confirm or correct this perception?
> 
> A a general rule, confirm. It can't hurt (other than the time it takes)
> and might help a lot. You should use the same tool to update that you
> use to upgrade.

Does synaptic not use the same lists as APT? I thought it was
merely a frontend (some screens of which look very like the
pre-APT dselect from the last century).

> E.g.:
> 
> apt update && apt upgrade
> 
> A daily cron job to do the update or daily auto upgrades should be
> sufficient.

Bret Busby having earlier written:

> I recently installed a package using apt install,m that synaptic did not
> find by searching.

As a synaptic user at times, can I ask you whether synaptic
auto-updates the repository lists when you perform a search?
[I take it "m" is just a typo.]

Looking at the help files that synaptic presumably uses,
I would say that the labelling the Update button with
"Reload Package Information" makes it seem like a heavier
operation than it is (or ought to be). One might think
it's going to re-download all 152MB (Debian bullseye)
of the lists, whereas it's usually a fraction of that,
eg today:

  Hit:1 http://security.debian.org/debian-security bullseye-security InRelease
  Hit:2 http://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye InRelease
  Hit:3 http://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye-updates InRelease

basically, nothing.

Cheers,
David.

Reply to: