Morten Bo Johansen <m...@spamcop.net> writes: > On 2013-10-13 Dmitrii Kashin wrote: > >> I think that aptitude works quite well for the easiest cases. And it is >> the only instrument I know which allow to see dependency chains. It was >> dselect some time ago which could do it too as I know, but now it seems >> to be dead. BTW, it provides with good capabilities for searching >> through packages. > > Remember that aptitude has evolved quite a bit.
> The scenarios that you and some others describe are not necessarily > pertinent anymore. It was about a year ago. > Most often, I find that I can solve dependency problems by simply not > upgrading one or more packages. You do that easily... ...hold them with apt-mark. But I prefer pinning. > For instance, at the moment the package xul-ext-greasemonkey is marked > as upgradable on my system, but the package's metadata has Iceweasel > in a non-installable version as a dependency. Aptitude wants to remove > xul-ext-greasemonkey and apt-get wants to remove Iceweasel. In this case apt-get usually wants to keep package not upgraded. And, btw, why don't you use upgrade instead of dist-upgrade? Well, folks, it was an interesting thread, but I think it needs to be finished. We've just started another holywar discussion. It is sad.
pgprs8MQPaYM8.pgp
Description: PGP signature
