Re: Bug#25026: apt: Why do you list the packages you're _not_ doing anything to instead of the ones you are?
Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@gpu.srv.ualberta.ca> writes:
> merge 22507 25026
> stop
>
> On Sat, 25 Jul 1998, Gregory S. Stark wrote:
>
> > This is awfully confusing, why do you list the packages being held back, rather
> > than listing the packages that you're upgrading? This means it's hard to judge
> > how many files remain or if you're accidentally upgrading something that must
> > not be.
>
> No, this makes alot of sense for a number of reasons. First, the list of
> packages to upgrade is often huge, there is no point in showing it because
> you'd never be able to get anything usefull out of it.
I'm curious to know how this behaves in APT v3. (I can't install it because I
depend on software that won't run on libc 6.1).
Is there indeed an option to have it display the list of packages that will be
upgraded?
It seems to me that the most sensible thing to do is to have a configurable
maximum number of packages to list for any of the groups. If there are fewer
than that maximum then just display the count of packages, otherwise provide
the list.
I still claim describing what *isn't* happening rather than what *is*
happening is pretty strange. There must be at least as many people who default
to not upgrading packages as there are who default to upgrading everything
without paying attention to what's being upgraded.
greg
Reply to: