Re: packages listed vs. apt-rdepends --follow=Depends ...
On Wed 06 Dec 2023 at 23:08:41 (+0000), Albretch Mueller wrote:
> On 12/2/23, Albretch Mueller <lbrtchx@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On 12/2/23, Tom Furie <tom@furie.org.uk> wrote:
> >> 'apt depends <package>' would list the direct dependencies without
> >> recursion.
> > $ apt depends wget 2>&1 | grep " Depends: " | awk '{ print $2}'
>
> that didn't work,
Tom said it wouldn't, and went on to give a recursive version.
> dpkg would still demand dependencies,
(dependencies of dependencies)
> so I decided
> to change the strategy to:
> 1) using apt-get install ...
> 2) save the install log into a file (apt-get install reports to you
> the order of installation) from which you can then created a dpkg
> based script
> 3) move all packages from /var/cache/ ... to wherever is needed.
I don't remember ever having to worry about the order. I would just
transfer the package cache from the connected PC (at work) to the
unconnected one (at home), and tell dpkg to install the lot, in one
gulp. At worst, the commands dpkg --configure -a and
apt-get -f install would clear any logjams.
> On 12/2/23, Darac Marjal <mailinglist@darac.org.uk> wrote:
> > There used to be "apt-zip" (no longer in Debian), which was
> > built around the idea of using ZIP disks for transferring files.
> > "apt-zip-list" would use the state of packages on the disconnected
> > system to product a "want list" of files to be downloaded. This "want
> > list" would be a shell script consisting of various wget or curl
> > commands. The script would be taken over to the connected system and
> > run, to pull the required packages onto a high-capacity removable medium
> > (such as a USB drive or ZIP drive). Back at the disconnected system,
> > "apt-zip-inst" would complete the process, installing the files from the
> > removable medium.
>
> Hmm! ... and the apt-zip functionality doesn't exist anymore in the
> same way that it rains and thunders when the Gods decide? When a
> package is removed or discontinued, is there a formal explanation as
> to why?
My guess would be that diminishing use with increasing broadband
availability led to no interest in maintaining it, particularly
through times when changes were made to APT.
https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=815456
Have you looked at apt-offline?
> I don't know why and I decided to change my approach, but I tried to use the:
> https://manpages.ubuntu.com/manpages/noble/en/man8/apt-get.8.html
> -s, --simulate, --just-print, --dry-run, --recon, --no-act
> functionality, but it didn't work:
> "E: Command line option --dry-run is not understood in combination
> with the other options"
> then I found confusing explanations about users being confused:
> https://serverfault.com/questions/1074702/apt-get-update-dry-run-command-does-not-work-anymore
↑↑↑↑↑↑
As the reference says, they were trying to use -s with update, but
update doesn't involve packages, only the packages index. Well,
you know update is going to get you—just read your sources.list—so
what's the point of -s.
Cheers,
David.
Reply to: