On Fri, 15 Jan 2016 00:27:19 +0000 Lisi Reisz <lisi.re...@gmail.com> wrote:
>On Thursday 14 January 2016 23:49:03 Gene Heskett wrote: >> On Thursday 14 January 2016 17:39:59 Johann Klammer wrote: >> > On 01/14/2016 10:50 PM, Gene Heskett wrote: >> > > On Thursday 14 January 2016 16:18:08 Johann Klammer wrote: >> > >> Synaptic runs on your box? >> > >> Years ago, when I tried it, it would always crash right on >> > >> startup.... use aptitude. It seems a lot more stable... >> > > >> > > Back on list where it belongs. >> > > >> > > I just ran it, and its obvious it doesn't reference the same >> > > database of installed files that apt and synaptic use. It just now >> > > wanted >> > >> > AFAIK, It does use the same database. Your system seems hosed... >> > Are you running it on the box that the OS is installed on, or on some >> > (boot... ,whatever) client? >> >> Directly on the os and box connected to this keyboard, no vpn's or >> anything else involved. >> >> > > to "upgrade" or sidegrade, 292 packages. Refreshing the list didn't >> > > help but it reminded me of the 4 color screens we had on the amiga's >> > > back in the amigados-1.3 days. Positively an assault on the >> > > eyeballs. >> > >> > press u to update. >> >> I did, didn't affect its faulty judgement a bit. It still wanted to >> update nearly 300 packages. >> >> > > But when an uptodate system is said to have 292 old or defective >> > > packages on it, I'm not sure I want it mucking around in MY used car >> > > lot. >> > >> > what kind of defective? broken? that means the dependencies are not >> > met... Press e to start the interactive resolver. >> > a and r to accept or reject. >> >> I'd have no clue what its doing in the background when I do that. FWIW, >> I had it hose the system on my laptop about 4 years ago with exactly >> this sort of a starting point. I'll pass as its 99.99% working right >> now. >> >> > > For what its worth, as root, an apt-get update, followed by an >> > > apt-get upgrade reports 0 package to upgrade. >> > > The answer may be in the above sentence. What does apt-get update, followed by apt-get dist-upgrade show? upgrade on its own does not upgrade all packages. It skips kernel and some other stuff. Perhaps that accounts for the differences? >> > > From that it would appear aptitude is confused at best, broken at >> > > worst. >> >> No comment? Seems like the above report does warrant some sort of a >> reply. > >Gene, it isn't worthy of a response, so Johann wisely ignored it. Johann - >Gene has wheezy-backports fully enabled in his sources.list, with, so far as >I can tell, the same pinning as the other sources. Synaptic used it to >upgrade over 300 packages. It is probably some kind of kludge, resulting >from this,that Aptitude is trying to sort out. > >Gene enjoys breaking his system and then seeing if he can make it run again. >Genuinely. I believe. If it actually ran smoothly he would probably be >bored, and immediately deliberately break it again. He wants to write all his >own scripts, and is frustrated that he is not as good at it as when he was >younger (I can empathise there!!), but uses a GUI package manager which isn't >as good at sorting out problems, and shies away from the CLI. :-/ > >But, as I say, Aptitude is probably unhappy with a system fully upgraded to >Backports. > >> >> > > All of these tools are, AFAIK, supposed to be using the same >> > > sources.list, and the same installed list. update-manager does but >> > > Obviously aptitude is not. >> > > >> > > I believe I'll stick to using synaptic. >> >> +10 > >Glad you still wholeheartedly agree with yourself, Gene. ;-) > >Lisi > -- Charlie Kravetz Linux Registered User Number 425914 [http://linuxcounter.net/user/425914.html] Never let anyone steal your DREAM. [http://keepingdreams.com]
