[Aptitude-devel] Bug#892141: holds produce APT warnings

[積丹尼 Dan Jacobson]

Package: aptitude
Version: 0.8.10-6
Severity: wishlist

If one holds chromium
uh  chromium - web browser
then full-upgrades now produce

W: APT had planned for dpkg to do more than it reported back (344 vs 348).
   Affected packages: chromium:amd64

Maybe intended?

___
Aptitude-devel mailing list
Aptitude-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/aptitude-devel

[Aptitude-devel] Bug#891866: Please don't mix units within the same sentance

[積丹尼 Dan Jacobson]

Package: aptitude
Version: 0.8.10-6
Severity: wishlist

Which are clearer?

Need to get 3,159 kB/131 MB of archives. After unpacking 195 MB will be freed.
Need to get 3.159/131 MB of archives. After unpacking 195 MB will be freed.

Need to get 316 cents out of 131 dollars.
Need to get 3.16/131 dollars.

Yes, discussed before.

___
Aptitude-devel mailing list
Aptitude-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/aptitude-devel

[Aptitude-devel] Bug#887739: Bug#887739: --simulate download now broken

[積丹尼 Dan Jacobson]

AB> So basically aptitude should just tell you that it would call 'apt
AB> download php7.1-imap'?

That would be fine.
Just don't have it brake down with the wheels flying off all over the
highway as it does currently.

___
Aptitude-devel mailing list
Aptitude-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/aptitude-devel

[Aptitude-devel] Bug#887732: Bug#887732: non-root user sacrifices half of disk to download one little package

[積丹尼 Dan Jacobson]

AB> 積丹尼 Dan Jacobson wrote:
>> Please mention that the difference between e.g.,
>> $ aptitude --download-only install php5-imap
>> $ aptitude download php5-imap
>> is the latter won't also get any dependencies.

AB> With the last thing you've got a point.

And do please cross-reference --download-only and download on the man
page, else users are certain to think they are aliases of each other.

AB> Nevertheless I can't imagine any case where someone would need to do
AB> that (without directly installing them).

On some machines we are not root so we can't directly install them but
they are still useful to us... Thanks.

___
Aptitude-devel mailing list
Aptitude-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/aptitude-devel

[Aptitude-devel] Bug#887739: --simulate download now broken

[積丹尼 Dan Jacobson]

Package: aptitude
Version: 0.8.10-6
Severity: minor

This used to work, but not anymore,

$ aptitude --simulate download php7.1-imap
Executing 'apt --simulate download php7.1-imap'

E: Command line option --simulate is not understood in combination with the 
other options
E: Failed to execute:
 'apt --simulate download php7.1-imap'
E: The process or trying to execute it exited with status/errno: 100

___
Aptitude-devel mailing list
Aptitude-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/aptitude-devel

[Aptitude-devel] Bug#887732: non-root user sacrifices half of disk to download one little package

[積丹尼 Dan Jacobson]

Package: aptitude
Version: 0.8.10-6

With plenty of disk space,

jidanni1@ps11007:/tmp$ df .
Filesystem 1K-blocks  Used Available Use% Mounted on
none  131072  2976128096   3% /tmp

our regular (non-root) user thinks "I'll use the power of aptitude to
download a package and any other required packages!"

jidanni1@ps11007:/tmp$ aptitude -o Debug::NoLocking=true -o Dir::Cache=/tmp 
--download-only install libbest-perl
The following NEW packages will be installed:
  libbest-perl
0 packages upgraded, 1 newly installed, 0 to remove and 0 not upgraded.
Need to get 15.0 kB of archives. After unpacking 65.5 kB will be used.
Get: 1 http://mirror.newdream.net/ubuntu/ trusty/universe libbest-perl all 
0.15-1 [15.0 kB]
Fetched 15.0 kB in 0s (1,096 kB/s)

"Hmmm, 15.0 kB, 65.5 kB, whatever. OK Good."

jidanni1@ps11007:/tmp$ df .
Filesystem 1K-blocks  Used Available Use% Mounted on
none  131072 60280 70792  46% /tmp

"Holy smokes, what happened? It ate half my disk space!"

jidanni1@ps11007:/tmp$ ls -Sog|head
-rw-r--r-- 1 29352344 01-19 21:19 pkgcache.bin
-rw-r--r-- 1 29311314 01-19 21:19 srcpkgcache.bin

"What do you want me to do, not set Dir?"

jidanni1@ps11007:/tmp$ aptitude -o Debug::NoLocking=true --download-only 
install libbest-perl
The following NEW packages will be installed:
  libbest-perl
0 packages upgraded, 1 newly installed, 0 to remove and 0 not upgraded.
Need to get 15.0 kB of archives. After unpacking 65.5 kB will be used.
Err http://mirror.newdream.net/ubuntu/ trusty/universe libbest-perl all 0.15-1
  Could not open file 
/var/cache/apt/archives/partial/libbest-perl_0.15-1_all.deb - open (13: 
Permission denied)
0% [Working]E: Failed to fetch 
http://mirror.newdream.net/ubuntu/pool/universe/libb/libbest-perl/libbest-perl_0.15-1_all.deb:
 Could not open file 
/var/cache/apt/archives/partial/libbest-perl_0.15-1_all.deb - open (13: 
Permission denied)
E: Some files failed to download

"All I wanted was one measly package."

"Now I have to clean up the mess left behind each time."

(Same problem with current Debian aptitude.)

Anyway do document on the man page, at --download-only, do document all
the things non-root people need to do...

___
Aptitude-devel mailing list
Aptitude-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/aptitude-devel

[Aptitude-devel] Bug#887624: Bug not seen on ubuntu

[積丹尼 Dan Jacobson]

Not seen on ubuntu's
$ aptitude --version
aptitude 0.6.8.2 compiled at Feb 17 2014 23:54:56
Compiler: g++ 4.8.2
Compiled against:
  apt version 4.12.0
  NCurses version 5.9
  libsigc++ version: 2.2.10
  Ept support enabled.
  Gtk+ support disabled.
  Qt support disabled.

Current library versions:
  NCurses version: ncurses 5.9.20140118
  cwidget version: 0.5.16
  Apt version: 4.12.0

___
Aptitude-devel mailing list
Aptitude-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/aptitude-devel

[Aptitude-devel] Bug#887639: $? still 0 despite error

[積丹尼 Dan Jacobson]

Package: aptitude
Version: 0.8.10-6

Perl has
  use warnings FATAL => 'all';
to halt and return non-zero to the shell upon anything unexpected.

Alas, aptitude gives no way to halt a shell script upon its errors at
least like the one in #887624.

Some people would like a chance to fix ANY error and not have the script
trundle on.

Sure some errors are not as important as others but they still are
things the programmer cares about and would like some way to stop and
fix them... just like the red light is beeping on your car dashboard. Some
people would like to pull over now... before a wheel comes off.

> "AB" == Axel Beckert  writes:
AB> This is a completely different issue. Please don't put more than one
AB> issue into one bug report.

OK I'll make a fresh one

AB> (And it's a well-known issue I'm quite sure that there exists a
AB> _wishlist_ bug report for years. There was the 0.6.9 branch which had
AB> this fixed, but it opened tons of other regressions and was hence was
AB> dropped as a dead end.)

I'll make a fresh one anyway.

___
Aptitude-devel mailing list
Aptitude-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/aptitude-devel

[Aptitude-devel] Bug#887624: $? still 0 despite error

[積丹尼 Dan Jacobson]

Also there should be a way to make aptitude stop scripts running it on
all errors. But as $0 is still 0 in this case that is impossible.
$ set -e
won't detect it!

___
Aptitude-devel mailing list
Aptitude-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/aptitude-devel

[Aptitude-devel] Bug#887624: new hardwired SetupAPTPartialDirectory foils non-root use

[積丹尼 Dan Jacobson]

Package: aptitude
Version: 0.8.10-6

There is something now hardwired into aptitude that no -o option can
change that causes this to complain when run as a regular user.

As you can see the user just wants to download some .debs including
dependencies and is not interested in locking any files or updating any
lists and you should let him do that.

$ aptitude -y -o Debug::NoLocking=true -o Dir::Cache=/tmp --download-only 
install libbest-perl
The following NEW packages will be installed:
  libbest-perl
0 packages upgraded, 1 newly installed, 0 to remove and 0 not upgraded.
Need to get 15.8 kB of archives. After unpacking 66.6 kB will be used.
Get: 1 http://free.nchc.org.tw/debian unstable/main amd64 libbest-perl all 
0.15-1 [15.8 kB]
Fetched 15.8 kB in 0s (73.7 kB/s)

Current status: 0 (+0) broken, 0 (+0) upgradable, 0 (-7302) new.
W: chmod 0700 of directory /var/lib/apt/lists/auxfiles failed - 
SetupAPTPartialDirectory (1: Operation not permitted)

___
Aptitude-devel mailing list
Aptitude-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/aptitude-devel

[Aptitude-devel] Bug#887421: Bug#887421: dpkg: warning: unable to delete old directory '/usr/share/man/gl/man8': Directory not empty

[積丹尼 Dan Jacobson]

Users will still freak out if any errors are printed like this so maybe also 
print a one-time
soothing message that will appear in the apt output.
If there is no way to do that then that should be a bug in itself.

___
Aptitude-devel mailing list
Aptitude-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/aptitude-devel

[Aptitude-devel] Bug#887421: dpkg: warning: unable to delete old directory '/usr/share/man/gl/man8': Directory not empty

[積丹尼 Dan Jacobson]

Package: aptitude
Version: 0.8.10-4
Severity: minor

Preparing to unpack .../04-aptitude_0.8.10-4_amd64.deb ...
Unpacking aptitude (0.8.10-4) over (0.8.10-3) ...
dpkg: warning: unable to delete old directory '/usr/share/man/gl/man8': 
Directory not empty
dpkg: warning: unable to delete old directory '/usr/share/man/gl': Directory 
not empty
dpkg: warning: unable to delete old directory '/usr/share/man/fi/man8': 
Directory not empty
Preparing to unpack .../05-aptitude-common_0.8.10-4_all.deb ...

$ find /usr/share/man/gl -ls
   697666  4 drwxr-xr-x   3 root root 4096 12月 26  2016 
/usr/share/man/gl
   697667  4 drwxr-xr-x   2 root root 4096  1月 16 17:53 
/usr/share/man/gl/man8
   655505  4 -rw-r--r--   1 root root 1270  1月 15 06:02 
/usr/share/man/gl/man8/aptitude-curses.8.gz
   697669  0 lrwxrwxrwx   1 root root   34  8月  1 20:04 
/usr/share/man/gl/man8/aptitude.8.gz -> /etc/alternatives/aptitude.gl.8.gz
$ find /usr/share/man/fi -ls
   691834  4 drwxr-xr-x   4 root root 4096 12月 26  2016 
/usr/share/man/fi
   691839  4 drwxr-xr-x   2 root root 4096  1月 16 17:53 
/usr/share/man/fi/man8
   655502  8 -rw-r--r--   1 root root 7192  1月 15 06:02 
/usr/share/man/fi/man8/aptitude-curses.8.gz
   691841  0 lrwxrwxrwx   1 root root   34  8月  1 20:03 
/usr/share/man/fi/man8/aptitude.8.gz -> /etc/alternatives/aptitude.fi.8.gz
   691835  4 drwxr-xr-x   2 root root 4096  9月 30 00:24 
/usr/share/man/fi/man1
   682793  4 -rw-r--r--   1 root root 1067  9月 28 00:45 
/usr/share/man/fi/man1/chfn.1.gz
   682794  4 -rw-r--r--   1 root root  984  9月 28 00:45 
/usr/share/man/fi/man1/chsh.1.gz
   654897  4 -rw-r--r--   1 root root 1737  9月 28 00:45 
/usr/share/man/fi/man1/su.1.gz

___
Aptitude-devel mailing list
Aptitude-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/aptitude-devel

[Aptitude-devel] Bug#883080: Wrong version "already installed" when -t is used

[積丹尼 Dan Jacobson]

Package: aptitude
Version: 0.8.10-1

# set firefox
# apt-cache policy $@
firefox:
  Installed: 58.0~b4-1
  Candidate: 58.0~b4-1
  Version table:
 *** 58.0~b4-1 990
990 http://free.nchc.org.tw/debian experimental/main amd64 Packages
100 /var/lib/dpkg/status
 57.0-1 500
500 http://free.nchc.org.tw/debian unstable/main amd64 Packages
# aptitude -t unstable install $@
firefox is already installed at the requested version (58.0~b4-1) ## W R O N G 
##
# aptitude -t experimental install $@
firefox is already installed at the requested version (58.0~b4-1)
# dpkg -r firefox
Removing firefox (58.0~b4-1) ...
# aptitude -t unstable install $@
The following NEW packages will be installed:
  firefox
Setting up firefox (57.0-1) ... ## finally correct ##

APT::Default-Release "experimental";//just order them in sources.list UNTRUE
APT::AutoRemove::RecommendsImportant false;
APT::AutoRemove::SuggestsImportant false;
APT::Cache::AllVersions false;
APT::Clean-Installed false;
APT::Get::Fix-Missing true; //even though 825897 says should be off
APT::Install-Recommends false;
Aptitude::CmdLine::Always-Prompt true;

___
Aptitude-devel mailing list
Aptitude-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/aptitude-devel

[Aptitude-devel] Bug#879709: aptitude full-upgrade will ask to remove unar

[積丹尼 Dan Jacobson]

reopen 879709
reassign 879709 unar
found 879709 1.10.1-2
thanks
Dear unar maintainer,

If one has a combined sid/experimental system,
after doing
# aptitude -t sid install unar
any
# aptitude full-upgrade
will ask to remove unar.

___
Aptitude-devel mailing list
Aptitude-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/aptitude-devel

[Aptitude-devel] Bug#879709: cannot install unar

[積丹尼 Dan Jacobson]

Package: aptitude
Version: 0.8.9-1

Cannot install unar

# aptitude install unar
The following NEW packages will be installed:
  libgnustep-base1.24{ab} (D: gnustep-base-common) (unar D: libgnustep-base1.24)
  libobjc4{a} (D: libgnustep-base1.24, D: unar) (unar D: libobjc4)  unar
The following packages will be upgraded:
  gcc-8-base (unar D: libobjc4 D: gcc-8-base)
The following packages will NOT be UPGRADED:
  libatomic1{ab} (D: gcc-8-base)  libcc1-0{ab} (D: gcc-8-base)  libcilkrts5{ab} 
(D: gcc-8-base)
  libgcc1{ab} (D: gcc-8-base)  libgomp1{ab} (D: gcc-8-base)  libitm1{ab} (D: 
gcc-8-base)  libmpx2{ab} (D: gcc-8-base)
  libquadmath0{ab} (D: gcc-8-base)  libstdc++6{ab} (D: gcc-8-base)
1 packages upgraded, 3 newly installed, 0 to remove and 9 not upgraded.
Need to get 234 kB/2,662 kB of archives. After unpacking 11.5 MB will be used.
The following packages have unmet dependencies:
 libmpx2 : Depends: gcc-8-base (= 8-20171016-1) but 8-20171023-1 is to be 
installed
 libitm1 : Depends: gcc-8-base (= 8-20171016-1) but 8-20171023-1 is to be 
installed
 libcilkrts5 : Depends: gcc-8-base (= 8-20171016-1) but 8-20171023-1 is to be 
installed
 libasan4 : Depends: gcc-8-base (= 8-20171016-1) but 8-20171023-1 is to be 
installed
 libquadmath0 : Depends: gcc-8-base (= 8-20171016-1) but 8-20171023-1 is to be 
installed
 libgcc1 : Depends: gcc-8-base (= 8-20171016-1) but 8-20171023-1 is to be 
installed
 libubsan0 : Depends: gcc-8-base (= 8-20171016-1) but 8-20171023-1 is to be 
installed
 libgnustep-base1.24 : Depends: gnustep-base-common (= 1.24.9-3.1) but it is 
not going to be installed
 libgomp1 : Depends: gcc-8-base (= 8-20171016-1) but 8-20171023-1 is to be 
installed
 libatomic1 : Depends: gcc-8-base (= 8-20171016-1) but 8-20171023-1 is to be 
installed
 libcc1-0 : Depends: gcc-8-base (= 8-20171016-1) but 8-20171023-1 is to be 
installed
 libstdc++6 : Depends: gcc-8-base (= 8-20171016-1) but 8-20171023-1 is to be 
installed
open: 44; closed: 76; defer: 2; conflict: 5 
   oThe following actions will resolve 
these dependencies:

 Keep the following packages at their current version:
1) gcc-8-base [8-20171016-1 (now)]
2) libgnustep-base1.24 [Not Installed]
3) libobjc4 [Not Installed]
4) unar [Not Installed]



Accept this solution? [Y/n/q/?] n
open: 72; closed: 147; defer: 5; conflict: 9
   .The following actions will resolve 
these dependencies:

  Remove the following packages:
1)  g++ [4:7.2.0-1d1 (now, unstable)]
2)  g++-7 [7.2.0-11 (now, unstable)]
3)  gcc [4:7.2.0-1d1 (now, unstable)]
4)  gcc-7 [7.2.0-11 (now, unstable)]
5)  libasan4 [8-20171016-1 (now)]
6)  libgcc-7-dev [7.2.0-11 (now, unstable)]
7)  libstdc++-7-dev [7.2.0-11 (now, unstable)]
8)  libubsan0 [8-20171016-1 (now)]

  Keep the following packages at their current version:
9)  libgnustep-base1.24 [Not Installed]
10) unar [Not Installed]

  Upgrade the following packages:
11) libatomic1 [8-20171016-1 (now) -> 8-20171023-1 (experimental)]
12) libcc1-0 [8-20171016-1 (now) -> 8-20171023-1 (experimental)]
13) libcilkrts5 [8-20171016-1 (now) -> 8-20171023-1 (experimental)]
14) libgcc1 [1:8-20171016-1 (now) -> 1:8-20171023-1 (experimental)]
15) libgomp1 [8-20171016-1 (now) -> 8-20171023-1 (experimental)]
16) libitm1 [8-20171016-1 (now) -> 8-20171023-1 (experimental)]
17) libmpx2 [8-20171016-1 (now) -> 8-20171023-1 (experimental)]
18) libquadmath0 [8-20171016-1 (now) -> 8-20171023-1 (experimental)]
19) libstdc++6 [8-20171016-1 (now) -> 8-20171023-1 (experimental)]



Accept this solution? [Y/n/q/?] n
The following actions will resolve these dependencies:

  Remove the following packages:
1)  g++ [4:7.2.0-1d1 (now, unstable)]
2)  g++-7 [7.2.0-11 (now, unstable)]
3)  gcc [4:7.2.0-1d1 (now, unstable)]
4)  gcc-7 [7.2.0-11 (now, unstable)]
5)  libasan4 [8-20171016-1 (now)]
6)  libgcc-7-dev [7.2.0-11 (now, unstable)]
7)  libmpx2 [8-20171016-1 (now)]
8)  libstdc++-7-dev [7.2.0-11 (now, unstable)]
9)  libubsan0 [8-20171016-1 (now)]

  Keep the following packages at their current version:
10) libgnustep-base1.24 [Not Installed]
11) unar [Not Installed]

  Upgrade the following packages:
12) libatomic1 [8-20171016-1 (now) -> 8-20171023-1 (experimental)]
13) libcc1-0 [8-20171016-1 (now) -> 8-20171023-1 (experimental)]
14) libcilkrts5 [8-20171016-1 (now) -> 8-20171023-1 (experimental)]
15) libgcc1 [1:8-20171016-1 (now) -> 1:8-20171023-1 (experimental)]
16) libgomp1 [8-20171016-1 (now) -> 8-20171023-1 (experimental)]
17) libitm1 [8-20171016-1 (now) -> 8-20171023-1 (experimental)]
18) libquadmath0 [8-20171016-1 (now) -> 8-20171023-1 (experimental)]
19) libstdc++6 [8-20171016-1 (now) -> 8-20171023-1 (experimental)]



Accept 

[Aptitude-devel] Bug#873893: what threw away downloads

[積丹尼 Dan Jacobson]

... also easier to tell if indeed the user threw away some of the
downloads himself...

___
Aptitude-devel mailing list
Aptitude-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/aptitude-devel

[Aptitude-devel] Bug#873893: log --download-only

[積丹尼 Dan Jacobson]

Package: aptitude
Version: 0.8.8-1
Severity: wishlist

/var/log/aptitude should also log --download-only events.

Then we could send you bug reports on the --download-only option if
later offline we discover that it didn't get all it needs.

___
Aptitude-devel mailing list
Aptitude-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/aptitude-devel

[Aptitude-devel] Bug#873274: add --with-suggests --without-suggests

[積丹尼 Dan Jacobson]

Package: aptitude
Version: 0.8.9-1
Severity: wishlist

There is already
--with-recommends
--without-recommends
Please add
--with-suggests
--without-suggests
even if one can get the same affect via -o 

___
Aptitude-devel mailing list
Aptitude-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/aptitude-devel

[Aptitude-devel] Bug#867635: Bug#867635: mention --target-release will not work on packages already installed

[積丹尼 Dan Jacobson]

OK then at the bottom of

   -t , --target-release 
   Set the release from which packages should be installed. For
   instance, "aptitude -t experimental ..."  will install packages
   from the experimental distribution unless you specify otherwise.

   This will affect the default candidate version of packages
   according to the rules described in apt_preferences(5).

   This corresponds to the configuration item APT::Default-Release.

please add

   Thus -t will only upgrade. To downgrade, append '=version' to
   each package.

else there is little chance the user will master the apt_preferences man
page well enough to understand that.

DK> You have to apply extra force if you really want that (pkg/release),
DK> but note that downgrading packages isn't
DK> officially supported by Debian so you might end up with a broken system
DK> if you downgrade the wrong package.

OK, perhaps also mention how make -t work for downgrades too...

E.g., The user would like to downgrade package A along with its dependencies.

___
Aptitude-devel mailing list
Aptitude-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/aptitude-devel

[Aptitude-devel] Bug#867635: mention --target-release will not work on packages already installed

[積丹尼 Dan Jacobson]

Package: aptitude
Version: 0.8.8-1
Severity: wishlist
File: /usr/share/man/man8/aptitude-curses.8.gz

We read
   -t , --target-release 
   Set the release from which packages should be installed. For
   instance, "aptitude -t experimental ..."  will install packages
   from the experimental distribution unless you specify otherwise.

   This will affect the default candidate version of packages
   according to the rules described in apt_preferences(5).

   This corresponds to the configuration item APT::Default-Release.

Mention
   If the packages to be installed are already installed, this
   cannot be used to change their versions! [BUG!]

# apt-cache policy libjavascriptcoregtk-4.0-18
libjavascriptcoregtk-4.0-18:
  Installed: 2.17.4-1
  Candidate: 2.17.4-1
  Version table:
 *** 2.17.4-1 990
990 http://free.nchc.org.tw/debian experimental/main i386 Packages
100 /var/lib/dpkg/status
 2.16.5-1 500
500 http://free.nchc.org.tw/debian unstable/main i386 Packages
# aptitude -t unstable install libjavascriptcoregtk-4.0-18
libjavascriptcoregtk-4.0-18 is already installed at the requested version 
(2.17.4-1)

The "requested version" is the "unstable" version, not what the output
above says, so... BUG! (else why did the user use -t?)

___
Aptitude-devel mailing list
Aptitude-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/aptitude-devel

[Aptitude-devel] Bug#867585: mention why there is no "unkeep"

[積丹尼 Dan Jacobson]

Package: aptitude
Version: 0.8.8-1
Severity: wishlist
File: /usr/share/man/man8/aptitude-curses.8.gz

We read
   The difference between hold and keep is that hold will cause a
   package to be ignored by future safe-upgrade or full-upgrade
   commands, while keep merely cancels any scheduled actions on the
   package.  unhold will allow a package to be upgraded by future
   safe-upgrade or full-upgrade commands, without otherwise altering
   its state.

Perhaps add (if my hunch is correct):

The reason there is no "unkeep" command is that keep only affects the
computations done on the current command line (I, Dan Jacobson, only
know about the command line and do not use the curses version of
aptitude.) No state is changed in /var/lib/aptitude/pkgstates (my
guess.) Thus doing only
# aptitude keep somepackage
is a no-op(?, and really should trigger an error?)
Therefore keep is only useful in combinations with install and
full-upgrade, safe-upgrade, in its ":" suffix form (at least on the
command line.)

(The above are all my guesses.)

___
Aptitude-devel mailing list
Aptitude-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/aptitude-devel

[Aptitude-devel] Bug#866974: found a way to break the logjam also affecting non-perl packages' aptitude safe-upgrade

[積丹尼 Dan Jacobson]

OK I finally found a way to move forward,
# aptitude safe-upgrade ~U!perl
185 packages upgraded, 7 newly installed, 4 to remove and 22 not upgraded.
Need to get 262 MB/283 MB of archives. After unpacking 51.8 MB will be used.
Do you want to continue? [Y/n/?] y

Now at least 185 other innocent packages can be upgraded.

___
Aptitude-devel mailing list
Aptitude-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/aptitude-devel

[Aptitude-devel] Bug#867036: aptitude full-upgrade when apt fails asks wrong question

[積丹尼 Dan Jacobson]

Package: aptitude
Version: 0.8.8-1
X-Debbugs-Cc: 866...@bugs.debian.org

Also in the case of Bug #866974 aptitude full-upgrade prompts with
  "Resolve these dependencies by hand? [N/+/-/_/:/?]"
but except for the N nothing else works and the question is just
repeated. "?" gets a list of commands but none of them work,
because apparently the list is coming from elsewhere. I'll file an
aptitude bug.

187 packages upgraded, 7 newly installed, 4 to remove and 20 not upgraded.
Need to get 267 MB/288 MB of archives. After unpacking 51.8 MB will be used.
aptitude failed to find a solution to these dependencies.  You can solve them 
yourself by hand or type 'n' to quit.
The following packages have unmet dependencies:
 libcpan-meta-perl : Breaks: libparse-cpan-meta-perl (< 1.4420) which is a 
virtual package, provided by:
 - perl-modules-5.24 (5.24.1-4), but 5.24.1-5 is to 
be installed
 - perl-modules-5.24 (5.24.1-5) provides 
libparse-cpan-meta-perl=1.4417.001, but 5.24.1-5 is to be installed
 - libcpan-meta-perl (2.150010-1) provides 
libparse-cpan-meta-perl=1.4420, but 2.150010-1 is installed
 - perl-modules-5.26 (5.26.0-2) provides 
libparse-cpan-meta-perl=2.150010, but it is not going to be installed

Resolve these dependencies by hand? [N/+/-/_/:/?] ?
Commands:
  y: continue with the installation
  n: abort and quit
  i: show information about one or more packages; the package names should 
follow the 'i'
  c: show the Debian changelogs of one or more packages; the package names 
should follow the 'c'
  d: toggle the display of dependency information
  s: toggle the display of changes in package sizes
  v: toggle the display of version numbers
  w: try to find a reason for installing a single package, or explain why 
installing one package should lead to installing another package.
  r: run the automatic dependency resolver to fix the broken dependencies.
  e: enter the full visual interface

  You may also specify modification to the actions which will be taken.  To do 
so, type an action character followed by one or more package names (or
  patterns).  The action will be applied to all the packages that you list.  
The following actions are available:

  '+' to install packages
  '+M' to install packages and immediately flag them as automatically installed
  '-' to remove packages
  '_' to purge packages
  '=' to place packages on hold
  ':' to keep packages in their current state without placing them on hold
  '' to mark packages as automatically installed
  '' to mark packages as manually installed
  '' to install the build-dependencies of a package.

  In the list of actions to be performed, some packages will be followed by one 
or more characters enclosed in braces; for instance: "aptitude{u}".
  These characters provide extra information about the package's state, and can 
include any combination of the following:

  'a': the package was automatically installed or removed.
  'b': some of the package's dependencies are violated by the proposed changes.
  'p': the package will be purged in addition to being removed.
  'u': the package is being removed because it is unused.
Resolve these dependencies by hand? [N/+/-/_/:/?] (entering any of the
  above just get the same Resolve these dependencies by hand prompt again.)

___
Aptitude-devel mailing list
Aptitude-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/aptitude-devel

[Aptitude-devel] Bug#866974: worrisome aptitude full-upgrade, aptitude install perl

[積丹尼 Dan Jacobson]

By the way, the program really should put a couple of newlines

"I want to resolve dependencies, but no dependency resolver was created.The 
following packages will be upgraded:"
^HERE

# aptitude install perl
Accept this solution? [Y/n/q/?] n
The following actions will resolve these dependencies:

 Keep the following packages at their current version:
1) libperl5.26 [Not Installed]
2) perl-doc [5.24.1-2 (now)]
3) perl-modules-5.26 [Not Installed]

 Upgrade the following packages:
4) libperl5.24 [5.24.1-2 (now) -> 5.24.1-5 (unstable)]
5) perl [5.24.1-2 (now) -> 5.24.1-5 (unstable)]
6) perl-base [5.24.1-2 (now) -> 5.24.1-5 (unstable)]
7) perl-modules-5.24 [5.24.1-4 (now) -> 5.24.1-5 (unstable)]



Accept this solution? [Y/n/q/?]
The following packages have unmet dependencies:
 libcpan-meta-perl : Breaks: libparse-cpan-meta-perl (< 1.4420) which is a 
virtual package, provided by:
 - perl-modules-5.24 (5.24.1-4), but 5.24.1-5 is to 
be installed
 - perl-modules-5.24 (5.24.1-5) provides 
libparse-cpan-meta-perl=1.4417.001, but 5.24.1-5 is to be installed
 - libcpan-meta-perl (2.150010-1) provides 
libparse-cpan-meta-perl=1.4420, but 2.150010-1 is installed
 - perl-modules-5.26 (5.26.0-2) provides 
libparse-cpan-meta-perl=2.150010, but it is not going to be installed

*** ERROR: search aborted by fatal exception.  You may continue
   searching, but some solutions will be unreachable.

I want to resolve dependencies, but no dependency resolver was created.The 
following packages will be upgraded:
  libperl5.24 (perl D: libperl5.24)  perl  perl-base  perl-modules-5.24
The following packages are RECOMMENDED but will NOT be installed:
  rename (R: perl)
The following packages will NOT be UPGRADED:

___
Aptitude-devel mailing list
Aptitude-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/aptitude-devel

[Aptitude-devel] Bug#855425: replay

[積丹尼 Dan Jacobson]

Here's a replay:

# aptitude install adb
The following NEW packages will be installed:
  adb{b} (B: android-tools-adb)  android-libadb{a} (D: adb) (adb D: 
android-libadb)
  android-libbase{a} (D: adb, D: android-libadb) (adb D: android-libbase)
  android-libcutils{a} (D: adb, D: android-libadb) (adb D: android-libcutils)
  android-liblog{a} (D: android-libbase, D: android-libcutils) (adb D: 
android-libcutils D: android-liblog)
The following packages are RECOMMENDED but will NOT be installed:
  android-sdk-platform-tools-common (R: adb)
The following packages will NOT be UPGRADED:
  libpam-systemd{a}  libsystemd0{a}  systemd{a} (S: policykit-1, S: 
systemd-container, S: systemd-ui, R: udev)
0 packages upgraded, 5 newly installed, 0 to remove and 3 not upgraded.
Need to get 0 B/230 kB of archives. After unpacking 620 kB will be used.
The following packages have unmet dependencies:
 adb : Breaks: android-tools-adb but 5.1.1.r29-2 is installed
The following actions will resolve these dependencies:

 Remove the following packages:
1) android-tools-adb [5.1.1.r29-2 (now)]



Accept this solution? [Y/n/q/?]
The following NEW packages will be installed:
  adb  android-libadb{a} (D: adb) (adb D: android-libadb)
  android-libbase{a} (D: adb, D: android-libadb) (adb D: android-libbase)
  android-libcutils{a} (D: adb, D: android-libadb) (adb D: android-libcutils)
  android-liblog{a} (D: android-libbase, D: android-libcutils) (adb D: 
android-libcutils D: android-liblog)
The following packages will be REMOVED:
  android-tools-adb{a}
The following packages are RECOMMENDED but will NOT be installed:
  android-sdk-platform-tools-common (R: adb)
The following packages will NOT be UPGRADED:
  libpam-systemd{a}  libsystemd0{a}  systemd{a} (S: policykit-1, S: 
systemd-container, S: systemd-ui, R: udev)
0 packages upgraded, 5 newly installed, 1 to remove and 3 not upgraded.
Need to get 0 B/230 kB of archives. After unpacking 386 kB will be used.
Do you want to continue? [Y/n/?]
(Reading database ... 103383 files and directories currently installed.)
Removing android-tools-adb (5.1.1.r29-2) ...
Selecting previously unselected package android-liblog.
(Reading database ... 103376 files and directories currently installed.)
Preparing to unpack .../android-liblog_1%3a7.0.0+r1-2_i386.deb ...
Unpacking android-liblog (1:7.0.0+r1-2) ...
Selecting previously unselected package android-libbase.
Preparing to unpack .../android-libbase_1%3a7.0.0+r1-2_i386.deb ...
Unpacking android-libbase (1:7.0.0+r1-2) ...
Selecting previously unselected package android-libcutils.
Preparing to unpack .../android-libcutils_1%3a7.0.0+r1-2_i386.deb ...
Unpacking android-libcutils (1:7.0.0+r1-2) ...
Selecting previously unselected package android-libadb.
Preparing to unpack .../android-libadb_1%3a7.0.0+r1-2_i386.deb ...
Unpacking android-libadb (1:7.0.0+r1-2) ...
Selecting previously unselected package adb.
Preparing to unpack .../adb_1%3a7.0.0+r1-2_i386.deb ...
Unpacking adb (1:7.0.0+r1-2) ...
Setting up android-liblog (1:7.0.0+r1-2) ...
Processing triggers for libc-bin (2.24-9) ...
Processing triggers for man-db (2.7.6.1-2) ...
Setting up android-libbase (1:7.0.0+r1-2) ...
Setting up android-libcutils (1:7.0.0+r1-2) ...
Setting up android-libadb (1:7.0.0+r1-2) ...
Setting up adb (1:7.0.0+r1-2) ...
Processing triggers for libc-bin (2.24-9) ...

Current status: 0 (+0) broken, 3 (+0) upgradable, 20649 (+0) new.
# aptitude purge ~c
The following packages will be REMOVED:
  android-tools-adb{p} (adb B: android-tools-adb)  vlc{p}
The following packages will NOT be UPGRADED:
  libpam-systemd{a}  libsystemd0{a}  systemd{a} (S: policykit-1, S: 
systemd-container, S: systemd-ui, R: udev)
0 packages upgraded, 0 newly installed, 2 to remove and 3 not upgraded.
Need to get 0 B of archives. After unpacking 0 B will be used.
Do you want to continue? [Y/n/?]
(Reading database ... 103405 files and directories currently installed.)
Purging configuration files for vlc (2.2.4-13) ...
Purging configuration files for android-tools-adb (5.1.1.r29-2) ...

Current status: 0 (+0) broken, 3 (+0) upgradable, 20649 (+0) new.
#



Also from the above,

The following packages will be REMOVED:
  android-tools-adb{a}

The following packages will be REMOVED:
  android-tools-adb{p} (adb B: android-tools-adb)  vlc{p}

despite the slight difference in the { },
I would say PURGED:.

OK trying with
-o Aptitude::CmdLine::Show-Deps=0 -o Aptitude::CmdLine::Show-Why=0 -o 
Aptitude::CmdLine::Verbose=0
still doesn't eliminate the { } so I suppose they will still always look 
different.

___
Aptitude-devel mailing list
Aptitude-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/aptitude-devel

[Aptitude-devel] Bug#855543: clarify configuration files on man page

[積丹尼 Dan Jacobson]

Package: aptitude
Version: 0.8.5-1
Severity: wishlist
File: /usr/share/man/man8/aptitude-curses.8.gz

Man page says

/etc/apt/apt.conf, /etc/apt/apt.conf.d/*, ~/.aptitude/config
   The configuration files for aptitude.  ~/.aptitude/config overrides
   /etc/apt/apt.conf. See apt.conf(5) for documentation of the format
   and contents of these files.

it should also say if it overrides /etc/apt/apt.conf.d/* and if
overrides means "is read after" or "is only read instead of".

___
Aptitude-devel mailing list
Aptitude-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/aptitude-devel

[Aptitude-devel] Bug#855425: Purge-Unused does not act for Breaks

[積丹尼 Dan Jacobson]

Package: aptitude
Version: 0.8.5-1
Severity: minor

Despite
APT::Default-Release "experimental";
APT::AutoRemove::RecommendsImportant false;
APT::AutoRemove::SuggestsImportant false;
APT::Cache::AllVersions false;
APT::Clean-Installed false;
APT::Get::Fix-Missing true;
APT::Get::List-Cleanup false;
APT::Get::Purge true;
APT::Install-Recommends false;
APT::Keep-Downloaded-Packages true;
Aptitude::Purge-Unused true;
if the user has obsolete package android-tools-adb installed,
and then installs adb, which breaks it, when android-tools-adb is
removed, it is not also purged.

___
Aptitude-devel mailing list
Aptitude-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/aptitude-devel

[Aptitude-devel] Bug#852266: also mention APT::AutoRemove::RecommendsImportant

[積丹尼 Dan Jacobson]

MAFM> APT::AutoRemove::RecommendsImportant is not appropriate in this
MAFM> explanation, unless one wants to be exhaustive and list all of the
MAFM> possible situations in which the autoremoval is considered, which is not

You do. You say "More precisely":
"More precisely: they will be removed when there is no path via Depends,
PreDepends, or Recommends to them from a manually installed package."

So the user thinks they have finally got the whole picture.

___
Aptitude-devel mailing list
Aptitude-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/aptitude-devel

[Aptitude-devel] Bug#852271: aptitude --without-recommends documentation correction

[積丹尼 Dan Jacobson]

That my new version looks like an older version is just a coincidence.
I want you to change it to say

>> The man page needs to be changed to say
>>
>> -R, --without-recommends
>> Do not treat recommendations as dependencies when installing new
>> packages (this overrides settings in /etc/apt/apt.conf and
>> ~/.aptitude/config). Packages previously installed due to
>> recommendations will not be removed unless
>> APT::AutoRemove::RecommendsImportant is false.
>>
>> This corresponds to the configuration option
>> APT::Install-Recommends.

-R doesn't "correspond" to two things. You need to separate them as I do.

___
Aptitude-devel mailing list
Aptitude-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/aptitude-devel

[Aptitude-devel] Bug#269097: not a word about it in the docs

[積丹尼 Dan Jacobson]

$ find /usr/share/doc/aptitude/html/en -name \*html|xargs grep -Pi 
\\bur[il]s|wc -l
0

One would think a program that would fetch things at least would also
have a way to tell what it wants to fetch.

I suppose one must use Man in the Middle techniques to pry this
information.

Or set up a phony proxy server.

Tons of use cases. Don't always assume the machine running aptitude is
the same one connected to the internet.

Don't always assume one wants to get the files at the same time one is
running aptitude, etc. etc. etc.

Also one sometime would like to know the URLs of something one is told
to download... within one's rights I suppose.

And this one can manipulate those URLs for whatever reasons one might want...

___
Aptitude-devel mailing list
Aptitude-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/aptitude-devel

[Aptitude-devel] Bug#852212: Bug#852212: installing and then purging sometimes leaves behind cruft

[積丹尼 Dan Jacobson]

OK thanks.

___
Aptitude-devel mailing list
Aptitude-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/aptitude-devel

[Aptitude-devel] Bug#852272: where is --install-suggests ?

[積丹尼 Dan Jacobson]

In fact nowhere in the documentation do you mention
APT::Install-Suggests .

$ find /usr/share/doc/aptitude/html/en -name \*.html|xargs grep 
APT::Install-Suggests
$

But you instead only mention its antidote,
APT::AutoRemove::SuggestsImportant .

$ find /usr/share/doc/aptitude/html/en -name \*.html|xargs grep -h 
APT::AutoRemove::SuggestsImportant |w3m -T text/html -dump
a manually installed package. If APT::AutoRemove::SuggestsImportant
Option: APT::AutoRemove::SuggestsImportant
Default: true
Description: This is an obsolete option; use APT::AutoRemove::SuggestsImportant
APT::AutoRemove::SuggestsImportant This is an obsolete option; use
APT::AutoRemove::SuggestsImportant APT::AutoRemove::SuggestsImportant

Whereas man apt-get has right there on the man page,

   --install-suggests
   Consider suggested packages as a dependency for installing.
   Configuration Item: APT::Install-Suggests.

So, aptitude documents the way to control Suggests removals,
but not the way to control Suggests installs in the first place!

___
Aptitude-devel mailing list
Aptitude-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/aptitude-devel

[Aptitude-devel] Bug#852272: #configApt-AutoRemove-SuggestsImportant should mention APT::Install-Suggests

[積丹尼 Dan Jacobson]

Package: aptitude-doc-en
Version: 0.8.4-1

https://aptitude.alioth.debian.org/doc/en/ch02s05s05.html#configApt-AutoRemove-SuggestsImportant
needs to mention APT::Install-Suggests
just like
https://aptitude.alioth.debian.org/doc/en/ch02s05s05.html#configApt-AutoRemove-RecommendsImportant
already mentions
APT::Install-Recommends.

___
Aptitude-devel mailing list
Aptitude-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/aptitude-devel

[Aptitude-devel] Bug#852271: aptitude --without-recommends documentation correction

[積丹尼 Dan Jacobson]

Package: aptitude
Version: 0.8.4-1
File: /usr/share/man/man8/aptitude-curses.8.gz

The man page needs to be changed to say

   -R, --without-recommends
   Do not treat recommendations as dependencies when installing new
   packages (this overrides settings in /etc/apt/apt.conf and
   ~/.aptitude/config). Packages previously installed due to
   recommendations will not be removed unless
   APT::AutoRemove::RecommendsImportant is false.

   This corresponds to the configuration option
   APT::Install-Recommends.

___
Aptitude-devel mailing list
Aptitude-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/aptitude-devel

[Aptitude-devel] Bug#852212: Bug#852212: installing and then purging sometimes leaves behind cruft

[積丹尼 Dan Jacobson]

It turns out all one needs is
APT::AutoRemove::RecommendsImportant false;

___
Aptitude-devel mailing list
Aptitude-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/aptitude-devel

[Aptitude-devel] Bug#852266: also mention APT::AutoRemove::RecommendsImportant

[積丹尼 Dan Jacobson]

Package: aptitude-doc-en
Version: 0.8.4-1
Severity: wishlist
File: /usr/share/doc/aptitude/html/en/ch02s02s06.html

https://aptitude.alioth.debian.org/doc/en/ch02s02s06.html
mentions
APT::AutoRemove::SuggestsImportant
but should also mention
APT::AutoRemove::RecommendsImportant .

___
Aptitude-devel mailing list
Aptitude-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/aptitude-devel

[Aptitude-devel] Bug#852265: Add a SEE ALSO to deborphan(1)

[積丹尼 Dan Jacobson]

Package: aptitude
Version: 0.8.4-1
Severity: wishlist
File: /usr/share/man/man8/aptitude-curses.8.gz

Add a SEE ALSO to deborphan(1).
Very appropriate.

___
Aptitude-devel mailing list
Aptitude-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/aptitude-devel

[Aptitude-devel] Bug#852212: installing and then purging sometimes leaves behind cruft

[積丹尼 Dan Jacobson]

Package: aptitude
Version: 0.8.4-1

# aptitude install tlp
also installs hdparm,
but then
# aptitude purge tlp
does not remove it.
It does remove the rest though, thankfully.

The following NEW packages will be installed:
  hdparm{a} (D: tlp, R: pm-utils) (tlp D: hdparm)  iw{a} (D: tlp) (tlp D: iw)
  libnl-3-200{a} (D: iw, D: libnl-genl-3-200) (tlp D: iw D: libnl-3-200)  
libnl-genl-3-200{a} (D: iw) (tlp D: iw D: libnl-genl-3-200)

I use
APT::Default-Release "experimental";
APT::Cache::AllVersions false;
APT::Clean-Installed false;
APT::Get::List-Cleanup false;
APT::Get::Fix-Missing true;
APT::Get::Purge true;
APT::Install-Recommends false;
Binary::apt::APT::Keep-Downloaded-Packages true;
APT::Keep-Downloaded-Packages true;
Aptitude::CmdLine::Always-Prompt true;
Aptitude::Purge-Unused true;
Aptitude::CmdLine::Show-Why true;
Aptitude::CmdLine::Show-Deps true;
Aptitude::CmdLine::Verbose 1;
Acquire::http::No-Cache true;
Acquire::PDiffs true;

___
Aptitude-devel mailing list
Aptitude-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/aptitude-devel

[Aptitude-devel] Bug#851908: Obsolete only removed not purged

[積丹尼 Dan Jacobson]

Package: aptitude
Version: 0.8.4-1
Severity: minor

Alas, even though one uses
Aptitude::Purge-Unused true;
there still needs to be a Aptitude::Purge-Obsolete or something, to get
rid of this too.

# aptitude search ~o
i   android-tools-adb   - Android Debug Bridge CLI 
tool
# aptitude install adb
The following NEW packages will be installed:
  adb{b} (B: android-tools-adb)  android-libadb{a} (D: adb) (adb D: 
android-libadb)
  android-libbase{a} (D: adb, D: android-libadb) (adb D: android-libbase)
  android-libcutils{a} (D: adb, D: android-libadb) (adb D: android-libcutils)
  android-liblog{a} (D: android-libbase, D: android-libcutils) (adb D: 
android-libcutils D: android-liblog)
The following packages are RECOMMENDED but will NOT be installed:
  android-sdk-platform-tools-common (R: adb)
0 packages upgraded, 5 newly installed, 0 to remove and 0 not upgraded.
Need to get 230 kB of archives. After unpacking 620 kB will be used.
The following packages have unmet dependencies:
 adb : Breaks: android-tools-adb but 5.1.1.r29-2 is installed
The following actions will resolve these dependencies:

 Remove the following packages:
1) android-tools-adb [5.1.1.r29-2 (now)]

Accept this solution? [Y/n/q/?]
The following NEW packages will be installed:
  adb  android-libadb{a} (D: adb) (adb D: android-libadb)
  android-libbase{a} (D: adb, D: android-libadb) (adb D:
  android-libbase)

  android-libcutils{a} (D: adb, D: android-libadb) (adb D: android-libcutils)
  android-liblog{a} (D: android-libbase, D: android-libcutils) (adb D: 
android-libcutils D: android-liblog)
The following packages will be REMOVED:
  android-tools-adb{a}
The following packages are RECOMMENDED but will NOT be installed:
  android-sdk-platform-tools-common (R: adb)
0 packages upgraded, 5 newly installed, 1 to remove and 0 not upgraded.
Need to get 230 kB of archives. After unpacking 386 kB will be used.
Do you want to continue? [Y/n/?]
Get: 1 http://free.nchc.org.tw/debian unstable/main i386 android-liblog i386 
1:7.0.0+r1-2 [18.4 kB]
Get: 2 http://free.nchc.org.tw/debian unstable/main i386 android-libbase i386 
1:7.0.0+r1-2 [21.0 kB]
Get: 3 http://free.nchc.org.tw/debian unstable/main i386 android-libcutils i386 
1:7.0.0+r1-2 [25.5 kB]
Get: 4 http://free.nchc.org.tw/debian unstable/main i386 android-libadb i386 
1:7.0.0+r1-2 [89.5 kB]
Get: 5 http://free.nchc.org.tw/debian unstable/main i386 adb i386 1:7.0.0+r1-2 
[75.7 kB]
Fetched 230 kB in 1s (187 kB/s)
(Reading database ... 149860 files and directories currently installed.)
Removing android-tools-adb (5.1.1.r29-2) ...
Selecting previously unselected package android-liblog.
(Reading database ... 149853 files and directories currently installed.)
Preparing to unpack .../android-liblog_1%3a7.0.0+r1-2_i386.deb ...
Unpacking android-liblog (1:7.0.0+r1-2) ...
...
Processing triggers for libc-bin (2.24-9) ...

Current status: 0 (+0) broken, 0 (+0) upgradable, 54373 (-1) new.
# aptitude purge ~c
The following packages will be REMOVED:
  android-tools-adb{p} (adb B: android-tools-adb)
0 packages upgraded, 0 newly installed, 1 to remove and 0 not upgraded.
Need to get 0 B of archives. After unpacking 0 B will be used.
Do you want to continue? [Y/n/?]
(Reading database ... 149882 files and directories currently installed.)
Purging configuration files for android-tools-adb (5.1.1.r29-2) ...

Current status: 0 (+0) broken, 0 (+0) upgradable, 54373 (+0) new.
#

Or maybe it doesn't have anything to do with obsolete vs. not obsolete.
Anyway, here is my apt-config dump:


apt-config-dump.gz
Description: apt-config dump
___
Aptitude-devel mailing list
Aptitude-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/aptitude-devel

[Aptitude-devel] Bug#842430: /var/cache/apt/archives/\*

[積丹尼 Dan Jacobson]

Package: aptitude
Version: 0.8.3-1+b1
Severity: wishlist

I notice file '/var/cache/apt/archives/*' on all my machine.
$ stat /var/cache/apt/archives/\*
  File: '/var/cache/apt/archives/*'
  Size: 0   Blocks: 0  IO Block: 4096   regular empty file
Device: 812h/2066d  Inode: 14  Links: 1
Access: (0644/-rw-r--r--)  Uid: (0/root)   Gid: (0/root)
Access: 2016-01-30 10:51:21.047306840 +0800
Modify: 2016-01-30 10:51:21.171306834 +0800
Change: 2016-10-29 12:44:46.880101991 +0800
 Birth: -

Not sure how it got there.
OK I'll remove it.

___
Aptitude-devel mailing list
Aptitude-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/aptitude-devel

[Aptitude-devel] Bug#842229: dpkg: warning: found unknown packages

[積丹尼 Dan Jacobson]

Package: aptitude
Version: 0.8.3-1+b1

# aptitude purge $@
The following packages will be REMOVED:
  asciidoc{p}  automake{p}  bison{p}  cpp-5{pu} (D: gcc-5)  dh-systemd{p}  
diffstat{pu} (D: quilt)  docutils-common{pu} (D: python-docutils)
  fonts-font-awesome{pu} (D: sphinx-rtd-theme-common)  fonts-lato{pu} (D: 
sphinx-rtd-theme-common)  gcc-5{p}  gcc-5-base{p}  kernel-wedge{p}
  libasan2{pu} (D: libgcc-5-dev)  libaudit-dev{p}  libbison-dev{pu} (D: bison)  
libcap-ng-dev{pu} (D: libaudit-dev)  libdw-dev{p}  libelf-dev{p}
  libexpat1-dev{pu} (D: libpython2.7-dev, D: python2.7-dev)  libgcc-5-dev{pu} 
(D: gcc-5)  libglib2.0-bin{pu} (D: libglib2.0-dev)  libglib2.0-dev{p}
  libiberty-dev{p}  libjs-modernizr{pu} (D: sphinx-rtd-theme-common)  
libjs-sphinxdoc{pu} (D: sphinx-common)  libjs-underscore{pu} (D: 
libjs-sphinxdoc)
  libmpx0{pu} (D: libgcc-5-dev)  libnewt-dev{p}  libnuma-dev{p}  libpci-dev{p}  
libperl-dev{p}  libpng-dev{pu} (D: libslang2-dev)
  libpython-dev{pu} (D: python-dev)  libpython2.7-dev{pu} (D: libpython-dev, D: 
python2.7-dev)  libslang2-dev{pu} (D: libnewt-dev)  libssl-dev{p}
  libunwind-dev{pu} (D: libunwind8-dev)  libunwind8{pu} (D: libunwind-dev)  
libunwind8-dev{p}  libwrap0-dev{p}  patchutils{p}
  python-alabaster{pu} (D: python-sphinx)  python-babel{pu} (D: python-sphinx)  
python-babel-localedata{pu} (D: python-babel)  python-dev{p}  python-docutils{p}
  python-imagesize{pu} (D: python-sphinx)  python-roman{pu} (D: 
python-docutils)  python-sphinx{p}  python-sphinx-rtd-theme{p}  python2.7{p}
  python2.7-dev{pu} (D: python-dev)  quilt{p}  sphinx-common{pu} (D: 
python-sphinx)  sphinx-rtd-theme-common{pu} (D: python-sphinx-rtd-theme)  
xmlto{p}
  xsltproc{pu} (D: xmlto)
The following packages will NOT be UPGRADED:
  gdal-bin  libgdal20{a}  python-gdal
0 packages upgraded, 0 newly installed, 57 to remove and 3 not upgraded.
Need to get 0 B of archives. After unpacking 179 MB will be freed.
The following packages have unmet dependencies:
 python : Depends: python2.7 (>= 2.7.11-11~) but it is not going to be installed
 gimp : Depends: python2.7 but it is not going to be installed
 python-nose : Depends: python2.7:any which is a virtual package, provided by:
- python2.7 (2.7.12-3+b1), but it is not going to be 
installed

 python-numpy : Depends: python2.7:any which is a virtual package, provided by:
 - python2.7 (2.7.12-3+b1), but it is not going to be 
installed

The following actions will resolve these dependencies:

 Keep the following packages at their current version:
1) python2.7 [2.7.12-3+b1 (now, unstable)]


Accept this solution? [Y/n/q/?]
The following packages will be REMOVED:
  asciidoc{p}  automake{p}  bison{p}  cpp-5{pu} (D: gcc-5)  dh-systemd{p}  
diffstat{pu} (D: quilt)  docutils-common{pu} (D: python-docutils)
  fonts-font-awesome{pu} (D: sphinx-rtd-theme-common)  fonts-lato{pu} (D: 
sphinx-rtd-theme-common)  gcc-5{p}  gcc-5-base{p}  kernel-wedge{p}
  libasan2{pu} (D: libgcc-5-dev)  libaudit-dev{p}  libbison-dev{pu} (D: bison)  
libcap-ng-dev{pu} (D: libaudit-dev)  libdw-dev{p}  libelf-dev{p}
  libexpat1-dev{pu} (D: libpython2.7-dev, D: python2.7-dev)  libgcc-5-dev{pu} 
(D: gcc-5)  libglib2.0-bin{pu} (D: libglib2.0-dev)  libglib2.0-dev{p}
  libiberty-dev{p}  libjs-modernizr{pu} (D: sphinx-rtd-theme-common)  
libjs-sphinxdoc{pu} (D: sphinx-common)  libjs-underscore{pu} (D: 
libjs-sphinxdoc)
  libmpx0{pu} (D: libgcc-5-dev)  libnewt-dev{p}  libnuma-dev{p}  libpci-dev{p}  
libperl-dev{p}  libpng-dev{pu} (D: libslang2-dev)
  libpython-dev{pu} (D: python-dev)  libpython2.7-dev{pu} (D: libpython-dev, D: 
python2.7-dev)  libslang2-dev{pu} (D: libnewt-dev)  libssl-dev{p}
  libunwind-dev{pu} (D: libunwind8-dev)  libunwind8{pu} (D: libunwind-dev)  
libunwind8-dev{p}  libwrap0-dev{p}  patchutils{p}
  python-alabaster{pu} (D: python-sphinx)  python-babel{pu} (D: python-sphinx)  
python-babel-localedata{pu} (D: python-babel)  python-dev{p}  python-docutils{p}
  python-imagesize{pu} (D: python-sphinx)  python-roman{pu} (D: 
python-docutils)  python-sphinx{p}  python-sphinx-rtd-theme{p}
  python2.7-dev{pu} (D: python-dev)  quilt{p}  sphinx-common{pu} (D: 
python-sphinx)  sphinx-rtd-theme-common{pu} (D: python-sphinx-rtd-theme)  
xmlto{p}
  xsltproc{pu} (D: xmlto)
The following packages will NOT be UPGRADED:
  gdal-bin  libgdal20{a}  python-gdal
0 packages upgraded, 0 newly installed, 56 to remove and 3 not upgraded.
Need to get 0 B of archives. After unpacking 179 MB will be freed.
Do you want to continue? [Y/n/?]
(Reading database ... 192589 files and directories currently installed.)
Removing asciidoc (8.6.9-3) ...
Removing automake (1:1.15-4) ...
update-alternatives: using /usr/bin/automake-1.11 to provide /usr/bin/automake 
(automake) in auto mode
Removing bison (2:3.0.4.dfsg-1) ...
Removing gcc-5 (5.4.1-3) ...
Removing cpp-5 (5.4.1-3) ...
Removing dh-systemd (10.2.2) ...
Removing quilt (0.63-5) ...
Removing diffstat (1.61-1) 

[Aptitude-devel] Bug#842221: W: Can't drop privileges for downloading as file 'linux_4.8.4-1~exp1.dsc' couldn't be accessed by user '_apt'. - pkgAcquire::Run (13: Permission denied)

[積丹尼 Dan Jacobson]

Package: aptitude
Version: 0.8.3-1+b1

# aptitude source linux
Executing 'apt source linux'

Reading package lists... Done
Selected version '4.8.4-1~exp1' (experimental) for linux
NOTICE: 'linux' packaging is maintained in the 'Git' version control system at:
https://anonscm.debian.org/git/kernel/linux.git
Please use:
git clone https://anonscm.debian.org/git/kernel/linux.git
to retrieve the latest (possibly unreleased) updates to the package.
Need to get 94.2 MB of source archives.
Get:1 http://free.nchc.org.tw/debian experimental/main linux 4.8.4-1~exp1 (dsc) 
[91.0 kB]
Get:2 http://free.nchc.org.tw/debian experimental/main linux 4.8.4-1~exp1 (tar) 
[93.3 MB]
Get:3 http://free.nchc.org.tw/debian experimental/main linux 4.8.4-1~exp1 
(diff) [790 kB]
Fetched 94.2 MB in 7min 13s (217 kB/s)
gpgv: unknown type of key resource 'trustedkeys.kbx'
gpgv: keyblock resource '/root/.gnupg/trustedkeys.kbx': General error
gpgv: Signature made 2016年10月24日 (週一) 09時17分07秒 CST
gpgv:using RSA key E7BFC8EC95861109
gpgv: Can't check signature: No public key
dpkg-source: warning: failed to verify signature on ./linux_4.8.4-1~exp1.dsc
dpkg-source: info: extracting linux in linux-4.8.4
dpkg-source: info: unpacking linux_4.8.4.orig.tar.xz
dpkg-source: info: unpacking linux_4.8.4-1~exp1.debian.tar.xz
dpkg-source: info: applying debian/version.patch
dpkg-source: info: applying debian/uname-version-timestamp.patch
dpkg-source: info: applying debian/kernelvariables.patch
dpkg-source: info: applying debian/gitignore.patch
dpkg-source: info: applying debian/mips-disable-werror.patch
dpkg-source: info: applying debian/arch-sh4-fix-uimage-build.patch
dpkg-source: info: applying debian/powerpcspe-omit-uimage.patch
dpkg-source: info: applying 
features/all/Kbuild-kconfig-Verbose-version-of-listnewconfig.patch
dpkg-source: info: applying debian/modpost-symbol-prefix.patch
dpkg-source: info: applying debian/tools-perf-version.patch
dpkg-source: info: applying debian/tools-perf-install.patch
dpkg-source: info: applying 
features/all/drivers-media-dvb-usb-af9005-request_firmware.patch
dpkg-source: info: applying 
debian/iwlwifi-do-not-request-unreleased-firmware.patch
dpkg-source: info: applying 
bugfix/all/firmware_class-log-every-success-and-failure.patch
dpkg-source: info: applying 
bugfix/all/firmware-remove-redundant-log-messages-from-drivers.patch
dpkg-source: info: applying 
bugfix/all/radeon-firmware-is-required-for-drm-and-kms-on-r600-onward.patch
dpkg-source: info: applying features/all/aufs4/aufs4-base.patch
dpkg-source: info: applying features/all/aufs4/aufs4-mmap.patch
dpkg-source: info: applying features/all/aufs4/aufs4-standalone.patch
dpkg-source: info: applying 
debian/af_802154-Disable-auto-loading-as-mitigation-against.patch
dpkg-source: info: applying 
debian/rds-Disable-auto-loading-as-mitigation-against-local.patch
dpkg-source: info: applying 
debian/decnet-Disable-auto-loading-as-mitigation-against-lo.patch
dpkg-source: info: applying 
debian/fs-enable-link-security-restrictions-by-default.patch
dpkg-source: info: applying debian/sched-autogroup-disabled.patch
dpkg-source: info: applying debian/yama-disable-by-default.patch
dpkg-source: info: applying 
debian/add-sysctl-to-disallow-unprivileged-CLONE_NEWUSER-by-default.patch
dpkg-source: info: applying 
features/all/security-perf-allow-further-restriction-of-perf_event_open.patch
dpkg-source: info: applying debian/cdc_ncm-cdc_mbim-use-ncm-by-default.patch
dpkg-source: info: applying debian/snd-pcsp-disable-autoload.patch
dpkg-source: info: applying bugfix/x86/viafb-autoload-on-olpc-xo1.5-only.patch
dpkg-source: info: applying 
debian/fanotify-taint-on-use-of-fanotify_access_permissions.patch
dpkg-source: info: applying 
bugfix/powerpc/powerpc-xmon-don-t-use-ld-on-32-bit.patch
dpkg-source: info: applying 
bugfix/arm64/arm64-mm-limit-task_size_64-for-compatibility.patch
dpkg-source: info: applying 
features/mips/MIPS-increase-MAX-PHYSMEM-BITS-on-Loongson-3-only.patch
dpkg-source: info: applying 
features/mips/MIPS-Loongson-3-Add-Loongson-LS3A-RS780E-1-way-machi.patch
dpkg-source: info: applying 
features/mips/MIPS-octeon-Add-support-for-the-UBNT-E200-board.patch
dpkg-source: info: applying features/x86/x86-memtest-WARN-if-bad-RAM-found.patch
dpkg-source: info: applying 
features/x86/x86-make-x32-syscall-support-conditional.patch
dpkg-source: info: applying 
bugfix/all/kbuild-use-nostdinc-in-compile-tests.patch
dpkg-source: info: applying bugfix/all/disable-some-marvell-phys.patch
dpkg-source: info: applying 
bugfix/all/fs-add-module_softdep-declarations-for-hard-coded-cr.patch
dpkg-source: info: applying 
bugfix/all/kbuild-do-not-use-hyphen-in-exported-variable-name.patch
dpkg-source: info: applying bugfix/all/ext4-fix-bug-838544.patch
dpkg-source: info: applying 
bugfix/all/mm-memcontrol-use-special-workqueue-for-creating-per-memcg-caches.patch
dpkg-source: info: applying 
features/all/securelevel/add-bsd-style-securelevel-support.patch
dpkg-source: info: 

[Aptitude-devel] Bug#842219: mention how to clean up if one doesn't need those build-depends anymore

[積丹尼 Dan Jacobson]

Package: aptitude
Version: 0.8.3-1+b1
Severity: wishlist
File: /usr/share/man/man8/aptitude-curses.8.gz

We read

   build-depends, build-dep
   Satisfy the build-dependencies of a package. Each package name may
   be a source package, in which case the build dependencies of that
   source package are installed; otherwise, binary packages are found
   in the same way as for the "install" command, and the
   build-dependencies of the source packages that build those binary
   packages are satisfied.

   If the command-line parameter --arch-only is present, only
   architecture-dependent build dependencies (i.e., not
   Build-Depends-Indep or Build-Conflicts-Indep) will be obeyed.

OK but then mention what command(s) can then remove all those packages
that got installed so that we are back at the state where we were before
using build-depends.

___
Aptitude-devel mailing list
Aptitude-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/aptitude-devel

[Aptitude-devel] Bug#841875: better message for build-dep error

[積丹尼 Dan Jacobson]

Package: aptitude
Version: 0.8.3-1+b1
Severity: wishlist
File: /usr/bin/aptitude-curses

Please use a message like apt-get does.
# aptitude build-dep linux
Unable to find the source package for "linux"
Unable to apply some actions, aborting
# apt-get build-dep linux
Reading package lists... Done
E: You must put some 'source' URIs in your sources.list

___
Aptitude-devel mailing list
Aptitude-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/aptitude-devel

[Aptitude-devel] Bug#840902: install debtags; purge debtags leaves behind residue

[積丹尼 Dan Jacobson]

Package: aptitude
Version: 0.8.3-1+b1
Severity: wishlist

# aptitude install debtags
# aptitude purge debtags #but that leaves behind junk, so must then do:
# aptitude purge python3-debian python3-six python3-chardet 
python3-pkg-resources python3-apt
using
#cat /etc/apt/apt.conf.d/10jidanni
APT::Default-Release "experimental";
APT::Cache::AllVersions false;
APT::Clean-Installed false;
APT::Get::Fix-Missing true;
APT::Get::Purge true;
APT::Install-Recommends false;
Binary::apt::APT::Keep-Downloaded-Packages true;
APT::Keep-Downloaded-Packages true;
Aptitude::CmdLine::Always-Prompt true;
Aptitude::Purge-Unused true;
Aptitude::CmdLine::Show-Why true;
Aptitude::CmdLine::Show-Deps true;
Aptitude::CmdLine::Verbose 1;
Acquire::http::No-Cache true;
Acquire::PDiffs true;

___
Aptitude-devel mailing list
Aptitude-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/aptitude-devel

[Aptitude-devel] Bug#836522: don't not show non-existent file names

[積丹尼 Dan Jacobson]

Package: aptitude
Version: 0.8.3-1
Severity: wishlist

Can you please not show non-existent file names,

Preparing to unpack .../09-locales_2.24-1_all.deb ...
Unpacking locales (2.24-1) over (2.24-0experimental1) ...
Preparing to unpack .../10-apt-doc_1.3~rc3_all.deb ...
Unpacking apt-doc (1.3~rc3) over (1.3~rc2) ...
Preparing to unpack .../11-bash-doc_4.4~rc2-1_all.deb ...

Instead just say
11 Preparing to unpack bash-doc_4.4~rc2-1_all.deb
or
Preparing to unpack 11 bash-doc_4.4~rc2-1_all.deb

This also avoids the user cutting and pasting non-existent file names.

___
Aptitude-devel mailing list
Aptitude-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/aptitude-devel

[Aptitude-devel] Bug#834967: say -t is different than /

[積丹尼 Dan Jacobson]

Package: aptitude
Version: 0.8.3-1
Severity: wishlist
File: /usr/share/man/man8/aptitude-curses.8.gz

At

   -t , --target-release 
   Set the release from which packages should be installed. For
   instance, "aptitude -t experimental ..."  will install packages
   from the experimental distribution unless you specify otherwise.

   This will affect the default candidate version of packages
   according to the rules described in apt_preferences(5).

   This corresponds to the configuration item APT::Default-Release.

please remind the user that -t is not the same as "/"

   To select a particular version of the package, append "="
   to the package name: for instance, "aptitude install apt=0.3.1".
   Similarly, to select a package from a particular archive, append
   "/" to the package name: for instance, "aptitude install
   apt/experimental". You cannot specify both an archive and a version
   for a package.

and that they should use "/" for cases like:


# apt-cache policy $@
midori:
  Installed: 0.5.12~wk2-exp1
  Candidate: 0.5.12~wk2-exp1
  Version table:
 *** 0.5.12~wk2-exp1 990
990 http://free.nchc.org.tw/debian experimental/main i386 Packages
100 /var/lib/dpkg/status
 0.5.11-ds1-4 500
500 http://free.nchc.org.tw/debian unstable/main i386 Packages
# aptitude -t unstable install $@
midori is already installed at the requested version (0.5.12~wk2-exp1)
midori is already installed at the requested version (0.5.12~wk2-exp1)
The following packages will NOT be UPGRADED:
  debian-reference-en  libcurses-perl{a}  libnet-ssleay-perl{a}
  libperl5.22{a} (R: libarchive-tar-perl, R: libcompress-raw-bzip2-perl, R: 
libcompress-raw-zlib-perl, R: libcompress-zlib-perl, R: libdigest-md5-perl, R: 
libdigest-sha-perl, R: libencode-perl, R: libio-compress-base-perl, R: 
libio-compress-bzip2-perl, R: libio-compress-perl, R: libio-compress-zlib-perl, 
R: libmime-base64-perl, R: libmodule-corelist-perl, R: libstorable-perl, R: 
libsys-syslog-perl, R: libthreads-perl, R: libthreads-shared-perl, R: 
libtime-hires-perl, R: libtime-piece-perl, R: perl, R: perl-base)
  libxml-libxml-perl{a}  perl  perl-base  perl-doc
No packages will be installed, upgraded, or removed.
0 packages upgraded, 0 newly installed, 0 to remove and 8 not upgraded.
Need to get 0 B of archives. After unpacking 0 B will be used.
Do you want to continue? [Y/n/?]

Current status: 0 (+0) broken, 8 (+0) upgradable, 52313 (+0) new.


# aptitude -t unstable reinstall $@
The following packages will be REINSTALLED:
  midori
The following packages will NOT be UPGRADED:
  debian-reference-en  libcurses-perl{a}  libnet-ssleay-perl{a}
  libperl5.22{a} (R: libarchive-tar-perl, R: libcompress-raw-bzip2-perl, R: 
libcompress-raw-zlib-perl, R: libcompress-zlib-perl, R: libdigest-md5-perl, R: 
libdigest-sha-perl, R: libencode-perl, R: libio-compress-base-perl, R: 
libio-compress-bzip2-perl, R: libio-compress-perl, R: libio-compress-zlib-perl, 
R: libmime-base64-perl, R: libmodule-corelist-perl, R: libstorable-perl, R: 
libsys-syslog-perl, R: libthreads-perl, R: libthreads-shared-perl, R: 
libtime-hires-perl, R: libtime-piece-perl, R: perl, R: perl-base)
  libxml-libxml-perl{a}  perl  perl-base  perl-doc
0 packages upgraded, 0 newly installed, 1 reinstalled, 0 to remove and 8 not 
upgraded.
Need to get 0 B/1,097 kB of archives. After unpacking 0 B will be used.
Do you want to continue? [Y/n/?]
(Reading database ... 138223 files and directories currently installed.)
Preparing to unpack .../midori_0.5.12~wk2-exp1_i386.deb ...
Unpacking midori (0.5.12~wk2-exp1) over (0.5.12~wk2-exp1) ...
Processing triggers for mime-support (3.60) ...
Processing triggers for desktop-file-utils (0.23-1) ...
Setting up midori (0.5.12~wk2-exp1) ...
Processing triggers for libc-bin (2.24-0experimental1) ...
Processing triggers for man-db (2.7.5-1) ...
Processing triggers for hicolor-icon-theme (0.15-1) ...

Current status: 0 (+0) broken, 8 (+0) upgradable, 52313 (+0) new.

___
Aptitude-devel mailing list
Aptitude-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/aptitude-devel

[Aptitude-devel] Bug#833423: Bug#833423: aptitude says packages are broken just because we didn't upgrade to our target (experimental)?

[積丹尼 Dan Jacobson]

AB> If so, please save that state with aptitude-create-state-bundle,
AB> upload the file (around 100 MB) somewhere and post the link here.

Even though it turns out to be only 37MB, but its contents are overkill
for the problem at hand.

___
Aptitude-devel mailing list
Aptitude-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/aptitude-devel

[Aptitude-devel] Bug#833423: Bug#833423: aptitude says packages are broken just because we didn't upgrade to our target (experimental)?

[積丹尼 Dan Jacobson]

> "AB" == Axel Beckert  writes:

AB> If so, please save that state with aptitude-create-state-bundle,
AB> upload the file (around 100 MB) somewhere and post the link here.

That would take long on my 2MB/64K connection.

Have this script instead



f.gz
Description: application/gzip
___
Aptitude-devel mailing list
Aptitude-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/aptitude-devel

[Aptitude-devel] Bug#833423: aptitude says packages are broken just because we didn't upgrade to our target (experimental)?

[積丹尼 Dan Jacobson]

> "MAFM" == Manuel A Fernandez Montecelo  
> writes:

MAFM> Do you still have the system in that state?  What does "why" say for
MAFM> those packages?

# aptitude why perl-doc |wc
   8963   39931  531886


w.gz
Description: application/gzip
___
Aptitude-devel mailing list
Aptitude-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/aptitude-devel

[Aptitude-devel] Bug#832907: n and . same?

[積丹尼 Dan Jacobson]

OK one day I will try "r" and "a".

___
Aptitude-devel mailing list
Aptitude-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/aptitude-devel

[Aptitude-devel] Bug#833423: aptitude says packages are broken just because we didn't upgrade to our target (experimental)?

[積丹尼 Dan Jacobson]

Package: aptitude
Version: 0.8.2-1
File: /usr/bin/aptitude-curses

The following results in "iB" installed BROKEN state,

# aptitude install perl
...
Accept this solution? [Y/n/q/?] n
The following actions will resolve these dependencies:

 Keep the following packages at their current version:
1) libperl5.24 [Not Installed]
2) perl-modules-5.24 [Not Installed]

 Upgrade the following packages:
3) libperl5.22 [5.22.2~rc1-1 (now) -> 5.22.2-3 (unstable)]
4) perl [5.22.2~rc1-1 (now) -> 5.22.2-3 (unstable)]
5) perl-base [5.22.2~rc1-1 (now) -> 5.22.2-3 (unstable)]
6) perl-doc [5.22.2~rc1-1 (now) -> 5.22.2-3 (unstable)]
7) perl-modules-5.22 [5.22.2~rc1-1 (now) -> 5.22.2-3 (unstable)]



Accept this solution? [Y/n/q/?]
The following packages will be upgraded:
  libperl5.22 (perl D: libperl5.22)  perl  perl-base  perl-doc
  perl-modules-5.22 (perl D: perl-modules-5.22)
The following packages are RECOMMENDED but will NOT be installed:
  rename (R: perl)
The following packages will NOT be UPGRADED:
  libdbd-mysql-perl  libglib-perl{a}  libgtk2-perl{a} (S: libgtk2-perl-doc)  
libhtml-parser-perl
  liblocale-gettext-perl  libnet-ssleay-perl{a}  libnetaddr-ip-perl
  libparams-classify-perl{a} (S: libscalar-number-perl)  
libparams-validate-perl  libsocket6-perl{a}
  libuuid-perl  libxml-libxml-perl  libxml-parser-perl{a}  mysql-client  
mysql-server  texinfo
5 packages upgraded, 0 newly installed, 0 to remove and 16 not upgraded.
Need to get 0 B/14.8 MB of archives. After unpacking 4,096 B will be freed.
Do you want to continue? [Y/n/?]
Reading changelogs...
apt-listchanges: Mailing root: apt-listchanges: changelogs for jidanni2
(Reading database ... 163348 files and directories currently installed.)
Preparing to unpack .../libperl5.22_5.22.2-3_i386.deb ...
Unpacking libperl5.22:i386 (5.22.2-3) over (5.22.2~rc1-1) ...
Preparing to unpack .../perl-doc_5.22.2-3_all.deb ...
Leaving 'diversion of /usr/bin/perldoc to /usr/bin/perldoc.stub by perl-doc'
Unpacking perl-doc (5.22.2-3) over (5.22.2~rc1-1) ...
Preparing to unpack .../perl_5.22.2-3_i386.deb ...
Unpacking perl (5.22.2-3) over (5.22.2~rc1-1) ...
Preparing to unpack .../perl-base_5.22.2-3_i386.deb ...
Unpacking perl-base (5.22.2-3) over (5.22.2~rc1-1) ...
Processing triggers for libc-bin (2.23.90+20160725.b898b64-1) ...
Processing triggers for man-db (2.7.5-1) ...
Setting up perl-base (5.22.2-3) ...
(Reading database ... 163349 files and directories currently installed.)
Preparing to unpack .../perl-modules-5.22_5.22.2-3_all.deb ...
Unpacking perl-modules-5.22 (5.22.2-3) over (5.22.2~rc1-1) ...
Setting up perl-modules-5.22 (5.22.2-3) ...
Setting up libperl5.22:i386 (5.22.2-3) ...
Setting up perl (5.22.2-3) ...
Setting up perl-doc (5.22.2-3) ...
Processing triggers for libc-bin (2.23.90+20160725.b898b64-1) ...

Current status: 0 (+0) broken, 19 (-2) upgradable, 52333 (+0) new.
14:48 ~# aptitude search ~U|sort|s
i  mysql-client - MySQL database client (metapackage depending on the latest 
version)
i  mysql-server - MySQL database server (metapackage depending on the latest 
version)
i  texinfo - Documentation system for on-line information and printed output
iB libdbd-mysql-perl - Perl5 database interface to the MySQL database
iB libhtml-parser-perl - collection of modules that parse HTML text documents
iB liblocale-gettext-perl - module using libc functions for 
internationalization in Perl
iB libnetaddr-ip-perl - IP address manipulation module
iB libparams-validate-perl - Perl module to validate parameters to Perl 
method/function calls
iB libuuid-perl - Perl extension for using UUID interfaces as defined in 
e2fsprogs
iB libxml-libxml-perl - Perl interface to the libxml2 library
iB perl - Larry Wall's Practical Extraction and Report Language
iBA libglib-perl - interface to the GLib and GObject libraries
iBA libgtk2-perl - Perl interface to the 2.x series of the Gimp Toolkit library
iBA libnet-ssleay-perl - Perl module for Secure Sockets Layer (SSL)
iBA libparams-classify-perl - Perl module for argument type classification
iBA libsocket6-perl - Perl extensions for IPv6
iBA libxml-parser-perl - Perl module for parsing XML files
iu perl-base - minimal Perl system
iu perl-doc - Perl documentation

In fact all we did was pick a version different than the target (experimental)
$ apt-cache policy perl
perl:
  Installed: 5.22.2-3
  Candidate: 5.24.0-1
  Version table:
 5.24.0-1 990
990 http://free.nchc.org.tw/debian experimental/main i386 Packages
 *** 5.22.2-3 500
500 http://free.nchc.org.tw/debian unstable/main i386 Packages
100 /var/lib/dpkg/status


Aptitude 0.8.2: log report
Thu, Aug  4 2016 14:47:41 +0800

  IMPORTANT: this log only lists intended actions; actions which fail
  due to dpkg problems may not be completed.

Will install 5 packages, and remove 0 packages.
4096 B of disk space will be freed

[HOLD, DEPENDENCIES] libglib-perl:i386 3:1.320-2
[HOLD, 

[Aptitude-devel] Bug#825901: Internal error: couldn't generate list of packages to download

[積丹尼 Dan Jacobson]

MAFM> What does "dpkg --status imagemagick" say?

In the end I completely purged all the imagemagick stuff and then
reinstalled fresh. Now everything is normal.

Otherwise just by upgrading I saw nightmares like "/etc/etc/"
directories, etc.

___
Aptitude-devel mailing list
Aptitude-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/aptitude-devel

[Aptitude-devel] Bug#497137: closed by "Manuel A. Fernandez Montecelo" <manuel.montez...@gmail.com> (Re: "download" command ignores cache and directly goes to HTTP!)

[積丹尼 Dan Jacobson]

B> aptitude is going to use apt command direcly for this, so any problem of
B> the implementation to be submitted there (I was told that there's a bug
B> number about this, but couldn't find it after a few minutes searching).

OK. Maybe download really means download. Well I just report things that
are currently bothering me, so I'll not check further...

___
Aptitude-devel mailing list
Aptitude-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/aptitude-devel

[Aptitude-devel] Bug#825901: Internal error: couldn't generate list of packages to download

[積丹尼 Dan Jacobson]

> "MAFM" == Manuel A Fernandez Montecelo  
> writes:

MAFM> Do you have any more info to know why 8:6.8.9.9-7+b1 instead of +b2 is
MAFM> chosen?  What's the current status of imagemagick?  (e.g. half
MAFM> configured or something?).

All I know is the newer one makes a lot of dangling symlins so I had put
it on hold previouly.

I probably checked if I reported it before, and found 758792 and thought
that I did, but that turns out to be a previous bug. Now I am getting
these other bugs so I'm scared to try upgrading it again, and will wait
for a new imagemagick.

Now:
# set imagemagick
# apt-cache policy $@
imagemagick:
  Installed: 8:6.9.2.10+dfsg-1
  Candidate: 8:6.9.2.10+dfsg-2
  Version table:
 8:6.9.2.10+dfsg-2 990
990 http://free.nchc.org.tw/debian experimental/main i386 Packages
 *** 8:6.9.2.10+dfsg-1 100
100 /var/lib/dpkg/status
 8:6.8.9.9-7+b2 500
500 http://free.nchc.org.tw/debian unstable/main i386 Packages

I put it on hold again due to so many problems.

___
Aptitude-devel mailing list
Aptitude-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/aptitude-devel

[Aptitude-devel] Bug#825901: infinite loop

[積丹尼 Dan Jacobson]

P.S., doing aptitude install imagemagick causes the infinite loop as
seen in 825897.

___
Aptitude-devel mailing list
Aptitude-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/aptitude-devel

[Aptitude-devel] Bug#825901: Internal error: couldn't generate list of packages to download

[積丹尼 Dan Jacobson]

Package: aptitude
Version: 0.8.1-1
Severity: wishlist

98 packages upgraded, 8 newly installed, 4 to remove and 13 not upgraded.
E: Can't find a source to download version '8:6.8.9.9-7+b1' of 
'imagemagick:i386'
After unpacking 30.5 MB will be freed.
Do you want to continue? [Y/n/?] 
E: Can't find a source to download version '8:6.8.9.9-7+b1' of 
'imagemagick:i386'
E: Internal error: couldn't generate list of packages to download
E: Perhaps the package lists are out of date, please try 'aptitude update' (or 
equivalent) first

Yes I tried aptitude update.

___
Aptitude-devel mailing list
Aptitude-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/aptitude-devel

[Aptitude-devel] Bug#825898: apt-get upgrade gets much farther than aptitude thanks to APT::Get::Fix-Missing

[積丹尼 Dan Jacobson]

Package: aptitude
Version: 0.8.1-1
Severity: wishlist

apt-get upgrade, when using
APT::Get::Fix-Missing true;
gets a lot more installed that
aptitude safe-upgrade

aptitude usually gives up when any more than a few of the downloads
fail, (e.g., when one is offline.)

164 packages upgraded, 8 newly installed, 4 to remove and 14 not upgraded.
Need to get 11.4 MB/299 MB of archives. After unpacking 27.3 MB will be freed.
Do you want to continue? [Y/n/?] 
Err http://free.nchc.org.tw/debian unstable/main i386 libabiword-3.0 i386 
3.0.1-7
  Temporary failure resolving 'free.nchc.org.tw'
Err http://free.nchc.org.tw/debian unstable/main i386 apache2 i386 2.4.20-2
  Temporary failure resolving 'free.nchc.org.tw'
Err http://free.nchc.org.tw/debian unstable/main i386 apache2-bin i386 2.4.20-2
  Temporary failure resolving 'free.nchc.org.tw'
Err http://free.nchc.org.tw/debian unstable/main i386 apache2-utils i386 
2.4.20-2
...

Then it gives up, even though some packages and their dependencies are
already downloaded.

In this case one must turn to apt-get, which allows us to get much farther.

# apt-get upgrade
Reading package lists... Done
Building dependency tree
Reading state information... Done
Calculating upgrade... Done
The following packages were automatically installed and are no longer required:
  libcamel-1.2-54 libqt4-opengl libqtwebkit4
Use 'apt autoremove' to remove them.
The following packages have been kept back:
  adwaita-icon-theme gnome-icon-theme libebook-contacts-1.2-2 libgtk-3-bin 
libgtk2.0-0 libgtk2.0-bin
  liblocale-gettext-perl libnetaddr-ip-perl libparams-validate-perl libperl5.22 
libpoppler-glib8
  libsocket6-perl libuuid-perl openssl perl perl-base perl-doc 
perl-modules-5.22 php-gettext poppler-utils
  texinfo
The following packages will be upgraded:
  abiword abiword-common apache2 apache2-bin apache2-data apache2-doc 
apache2-utils at-spi2-core basex
  bdf2psf chromium console-setup console-setup-linux cpp-6 debian-reference-en 
dh-strip-nondeterminism dialog
  dictionaries-common dnsmasq dnsmasq-base e2fslibs e2fsprogs 
evolution-data-server-common findutils gcc-6
  gcc-6-base gimp gimp-data hicolor-icon-theme ifupdown imagemagick 
imagemagick-6.q16 info
  init-system-helpers install-info keyboard-configuration libabiword-3.0 
libapache2-mod-php7.0 libapr1
  libasan3 libatk-bridge2.0-0 libatk-wrapper-java libatk-wrapper-java-jni 
libatomic1 libatspi2.0-0
  libcamel-1.2-57 libcap2 libcap2-bin libcc1-0 libccid libcilkrts5 libcomerr2 
libcupsfilters1
  libdebconfclient0 libebackend-1.2-10 libebook-1.2-16 libecal-1.2-19 
libedata-book-1.2-25
  libedataserver-1.2-21 libexpat1 libfile-stripnondeterminism-perl libgc1c2 
libgcc-6-dev libgcc1 libgd3
  libgfortran3 libgimp2.0 libgomp1 libgtk-3-0 libgtk-3-common libgtk2.0-common 
libinput-bin libinput10
  libisl15 libitm1 libjavascriptcoregtk-4.0-18 libjs-jquery-cookie 
libjs-jquery-event-drag
  libjs-jquery-metadata libjs-jquery-mousewheel libjs-jquery-tablesorter 
libjs-sphinxdoc libmpfr4 libmpx2
  libnghttp2-14 libopts25 libpcsclite1 libproj9 libqt4-dbus libqt4-declarative 
libqt4-designer libqt4-help
  libqt4-network libqt4-opengl libqt4-script libqt4-scripttools libqt4-sql 
libqt4-svg libqt4-test libqt4-xml
  libqt4-xmlpatterns libqtcore4 libqtdbus4 libqtgui4 libqtwebkit4 libquadmath0 
libraw15 libscim8v5
  libseccomp2 libspeechd2 libsqlite3-0 libss2 libstdc++6 libs
  libseccomp2 libspeechd2 libsqlite3-0 libss2 libstdc++6 libsystemd0 
libtest-simple-perl libtheora0 libubsan0
  libudev-dev libudev1 libunistring0 libwebkit2gtk-4.0-37 libxslt1.1 
linux-doc-4.5
  linux-image-4.5.0-2-686-pae locate mplayer ntp pcscd php7.0 php7.0-cli 
php7.0-common php7.0-json
  php7.0-mbstring php7.0-mysql php7.0-opcache php7.0-readline php7.0-xml 
phpmyadmin proj-bin proj-data
  python-pyscard python-qt4 qdbus qtchooser qtcore4-l10n resolvconf scim 
sqlite3 sqlite3-doc ssl-cert systemd
  systemd-sysv udev w3m w3m-el-snapshot xfstt xserver-xorg-input-evdev 
xserver-xorg-input-synaptics
  xserver-xorg-video-intel
159 upgraded, 0 newly installed, 0 to remove and 21 not upgraded.
Need to get 11.4 MB/282 MB of archives.
After this operation, 2,679 kB of additional disk space will be used.
Do you want to continue? [Y/n] 
Err:1 http://free.nchc.org.tw/debian unstable/main i386 apache2 i386 2.4.20-2
  Temporary failure resolving 'fr

Err:17 http://free.nchc.org.tw/debian unstable/main i386 php7.0 all 7.0.7-3
  Temporary failure resolving 'free.nchc.org.tw'
Err:18 http://free.nchc.org.tw/debian unstable/main i386 phpmyadmin all 
4:4.6.2-2
  Temporary failure resolving 'free.nchc.org.tw'
Reading changelogs...
apt-listchanges: Mailing root: apt-listchanges: changelogs for jidanni2
Extracting templates from packages: 100%
Preconfiguring packages ...
(Reading database ... 150515 files and directories currently installed.)
Preparing to unpack .../e2fslibs_1.43-3_i386.deb ...
Unpacking e2fslibs:i386 (1.43-3) over (1.43~WIP.2016.03.15-2) ...
...
-- Package-specific info:

[Aptitude-devel] Bug#498059: Always offer a "q" choice to [Y/n/?] etc.

[積丹尼 Dan Jacobson]

MAFM> Having "q" and "n" doing the same will not be good either.

MAFM> If implemented, we would soon have bug reports from "somebody" asking to
MAFM> clarify the difference between the two, or complaining that it's absurd
MAFM> to have the two when they actually do the same, etc.

(Well just document that there is no difference.) But OK never mind.

___
Aptitude-devel mailing list
Aptitude-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/aptitude-devel

[Aptitude-devel] Bug#822582: install package installs five, purge package purges 4

[積丹尼 Dan Jacobson]

Package: aptitude
Version: 0.8-1
Severity: wishlist

# set libhttp-recorder-perl
# aptitude install $@
(Installs 5 packages)
# aptitude purge $@
(purges 4 packages)
# set libsub-name-perl
# aptitude search $@
shows it is marked auto.
But they why must I remove it by hand?
# aptitude why $@
gives tons of output,
but that is probably due to my
$ apt-config dump|grep Apti
Aptitude "";
Aptitude::CmdLine "";
Aptitude::CmdLine::Always-Prompt "true";
Aptitude::CmdLine::Show-Why "true";
Aptitude::CmdLine::Show-Deps "true";
Aptitude::CmdLine::Verbose "1";
Aptitude::Purge-Unused "true";

___
Aptitude-devel mailing list
Aptitude-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/aptitude-devel

[Aptitude-devel] Bug#820486: I follow aptitude's advice and end up with a broken (B) package

[積丹尼 Dan Jacobson]

retitle 820486 be sure CLI shows same amount of info as curses for broken 
packages
thanks

MAFM> The curses interface says why the package is broken, I am not sure if
MAFM> cmdline's "why" does the same, but without knowing the source of the
MAFM> problem not much can be done.

OK, maybe just be sure we command line users are at no disadvantage vs.
curses users in terms of how much information is available in this case.

___
Aptitude-devel mailing list
Aptitude-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/aptitude-devel

[Aptitude-devel] Bug#822140: say if install x = install x+

[積丹尼 Dan Jacobson]

Package: aptitude
Version: 0.7.8-1
Severity: wishlist
File: /usr/share/man/man8/aptitude-curses.8.gz

We read:

   install
   Install one or more packages. The packages should be listed after
   the "install" command; if a package name contains a tilde character
   ("~") or a question mark ("?"), it will be treated as a search
   pattern and every package matching the pattern will be installed
   (see the section "Search Patterns" in the aptitude reference
   manual).

   [SPOT A]

   To select a particular version of the package, append "="
   to the package name: for instance, "aptitude install apt=0.3.1".
   Similarly, to select a package from a particular archive, append
   "/" to the package name: for instance, "aptitude install
   apt/experimental". You cannot specify both an archive and a version
   for a package.

   Not every package listed on the command line has to be installed;
   you can tell aptitude to do something different with a package by
   appending an "override specifier" to the name of the package. For
   example, aptitude remove wesnoth+ will install wesnoth, not remove
   it. The following override specifiers are available:

   +
   Install .

   If the package was not installed, it is marked as manually
   installed, and the dependencies newly installed are marked with
   the automatic flag. If the package or the dependencies were
   already installed, the automatic flag is preserved. See the
   section about automatic installations in the documentation for
   more information.

OK but what if one doesn't use the "+", e.g., when just using
# aptitude install norfblatz
is all of this:

   If the package was not installed, it is marked as manually
   installed, and the dependencies newly installed are marked with
   the automatic flag. If the package or the dependencies were
   already installed, the automatic flag is preserved.

then true too? You really should mention it at SPOT A above. Or say that
the "+" is the default action and optional.

I'm saying that you say what happens when "+" is added, but don't say if
that does or doesn't happen when it is not added.

P.S.,
   install
   Install one or more packages. The packages should be listed after

would be perhaps better written

   install [Package...]
   Install one or more packages. The packages should be listed after

___
Aptitude-devel mailing list
Aptitude-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/aptitude-devel

[Aptitude-devel] Bug#820486: I follow aptitude's advice and end up with a broken (B) package

[積丹尼 Dan Jacobson]

Package: aptitude
Version: 0.7.8-1

I follow aptitude's advice and end up with a broken (B) package:
iBA libgdal20  - 
Geospatial Data Abstraction Library
And why does it say 0 broken?
"Current status: 0 (+0) broken, 8 (+0) upgradable, 51509 (+0) new."

# aptitude search ~U
iF  debian-reference-en- Debian 
system administration guide, English original
i   gdal-bin   - 
Geospatial Data Abstraction Library - Utility programs
i A libclutter-gtk-1.0-0   - Open 
GL based interactive canvas library GTK+ widget
i A libgdal20  - 
Geospatial Data Abstraction Library
iFA libgtk-3-0 - GTK+ 
graphical user interface library
iFA libgtk-3-bin   - 
programs for the GTK+ graphical user interface library
iFA libgtk-3-common- common 
files for the GTK+ graphical user interface library
i   python-gdal- Python 
bindings to the Geospatial Data Abstraction Library
# aptitude install ~U~ngdal
The following NEW packages will be installed:
  libcrypto++6{a} (D: libgdal20) (gdal-bin D: libgdal20 D: libcrypto++6, 
python-gdal D: libgdal20 D: libcrypto++6)
  libqhull7{a} (D: libgdal20) (gdal-bin D: libgdal20 D: libqhull7, python-gdal 
D: libgdal20 D: libqhull7)
The following packages will be upgraded:
  gdal-bin  libgdal20 (gdal-bin D: libgdal20, python-gdal D: libgdal20)  
python-gdal
The following packages will NOT be UPGRADED:
  debian-reference-en  libclutter-gtk-1.0-0{a}  libgtk-3-0{a}  libgtk-3-bin{a}  
libgtk-3-common{a} (R: libgtk-3-0)
3 packages upgraded, 2 newly installed, 0 to remove and 5 not upgraded.
Need to get 7,495 kB of archives. After unpacking 6,698 kB will be used.
The following packages have unmet dependencies:
 libqgis-analysis2.14.1 : Depends: gdal-abi-2-0-2 which is a virtual package, 
provided by:
   - libgdal20 (2.0.2+dfsg-4), but 
2.1.0~beta1+dfsg-1~exp2 is to be installed
   - libgdal20 (2.0.2+dfsg-5+b1), but 
2.1.0~beta1+dfsg-1~exp2 is to be installed

 qgis : Depends: gdal-abi-2-0-2 which is a virtual package, provided by:
 - libgdal20 (2.0.2+dfsg-4), but 2.1.0~beta1+dfsg-1~exp2 is to 
be installed
 - libgdal20 (2.0.2+dfsg-5+b1), but 2.1.0~beta1+dfsg-1~exp2 is 
to be installed

The following actions will resolve these dependencies: [[I pick this 6th
or 7th choice]]

 Upgrade the following packages:
1) gdal-bin [2.0.2+dfsg-4 (now) -> 2.0.2+dfsg-5+b1 (unstable)]
2) libgdal20 [2.0.2+dfsg-4 (now) -> 2.0.2+dfsg-5+b1 (unstable)]
3) python-gdal [2.0.2+dfsg-4 (now) -> 2.0.2+dfsg-5+b1 (unstable)]

Accept this solution? [Y/n/q/?]
The following packages will be upgraded:
  gdal-bin  libgdal20  python-gdal
The following packages will NOT be UPGRADED:
  debian-reference-en  libclutter-gtk-1.0-0{a}  libgtk-3-0{a}  libgtk-3-bin{a}  
libgtk-3-common{a} (R: libgtk-3-0)
3 packages upgraded, 0 newly installed, 0 to remove and 5 not upgraded.
Need to get 5,704 kB of archives. After unpacking 21.5 kB will be freed.
Do you want to continue? [Y/n/?]
Get: 1 http://free.nchc.org.tw/debian unstable/main i386 libgdal20 i386 
2.0.2+dfsg-5+b1 [4,672 kB]
Get: 2 http://free.nchc.org.tw/debian unstable/main i386 gdal-bin i386 
2.0.2+dfsg-5+b1 [416 kB]
Get: 3 http://free.nchc.org.tw/debian unstable/main i386 python-gdal i386 
2.0.2+dfsg-5+b1 [616 kB]
Fetched 5,704 kB in 32s (175 kB/s)
(Reading database ... 182112 files and directories currently installed.)
Preparing to unpack .../libgdal20_2.0.2+dfsg-5+b1_i386.deb ...
Unpacking libgdal20 (2.0.2+dfsg-5+b1) over (2.0.2+dfsg-4) ...
Preparing to unpack .../gdal-bin_2.0.2+dfsg-5+b1_i386.deb ...
Unpacking gdal-bin (2.0.2+dfsg-5+b1) over (2.0.2+dfsg-4) ...
Preparing to unpack .../python-gdal_2.0.2+dfsg-5+b1_i386.deb ...
Unpacking python-gdal (2.0.2+dfsg-5+b1) over (2.0.2+dfsg-4) ...
Processing triggers for libc-bin (2.23-0experimental1) ...
Processing triggers for man-db (2.7.5-1) ...
Setting up libgdal20 (2.0.2+dfsg-5+b1) ...
Setting up gdal-bin (2.0.2+dfsg-5+b1) ...
Setting up python-gdal (2.0.2+dfsg-5+b1) ...
Processing triggers for libc-bin (2.23-0experimental1) ...

Current status: 0 (+0) broken, 8 (+0) upgradable, 51509 (+0) new.
# aptitude search ~U
iF  debian-reference-en- Debian 
system administration guide, English original
iu  gdal-bin   - 
Geospatial Data Abstraction Library - Utility programs
i A libclutter-gtk-1.0-0   - Open 
GL based interactive canvas 

[Aptitude-devel] Bug#819943: really should add an unforbid-version command

[積丹尼 Dan Jacobson]

> "MAFM" == Manuel A Fernandez Montecelo  
> writes:

MAFM> spend more time on re-reading the whole 3 paragraphs of documentation of
MAFM> this feature and see how they make sense.

Yes but most people take a quick look at the part of man pages they need
to check. Anyways as a long time reader of Risks Digest...

___
Aptitude-devel mailing list
Aptitude-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/aptitude-devel

[Aptitude-devel] Bug#819943: really should add an unforbid-version command

[積丹尼 Dan Jacobson]

I see. Please add the @()@:

   To revert the action, "aptitude install " will remove the
   ban. To remove the forbidden version without installing the
   candidate version, the current @(installed, not candidate)@
   version should be appended: "install =".

else people will think you mean Debian's current version, not my
computer's current version. Thanks.

___
Aptitude-devel mailing list
Aptitude-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/aptitude-devel

[Aptitude-devel] Bug#819943: really should add an unforbid-version command

[積丹尼 Dan Jacobson]

So indeed in the man page

   To remove the forbidden version without installing the
   candidate version, the current version should be appended: "install
   =".


is utterly totally wrong. Please remove it.

set debian-reference-en
aptitude forbid-version $@
aptitude search $@ #shows F
aptitude install $@=2.59 # abort with n, we don't want to install it.
aptitude search $@ #still F

Note I use Aptitude::CmdLine::Always-Prompt "true";

Please change it to

   Currently there is no way to remove the forbidden version without 
installing the
   candidate version.

Or better

   Currently there is no way to remove the forbidden version NOTATION 
without installing the
   candidate version.

Yes I know about hold.

___
Aptitude-devel mailing list
Aptitude-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/aptitude-devel

[Aptitude-devel] Bug#819943: really should add an unforbid-version command

[積丹尼 Dan Jacobson]

Package: aptitude
Version: 0.7.8-1

Today I will inspect the how hard it is to just simple reverse the action of
# aptitude forbid-version somepackage
so we are back to the state before we did it.

The man page says

   To revert the action, "aptitude install " will remove the
   ban. To remove the forbidden version without installing the
   candidate version, the current version should be appended: "install
   =".

Well I think you really should an unforbid-version command.

With no = then it should clear the forbidden version of that package(s).

Also the man page should say if only one version can be forbidden or
more.

Also one thinks I could just use forbid-version=0 to clear it, but that
is not a current version of that package.

And
# aptitude forbid-version package1 package2 package3 ... package20
will require an enormous amount of work to reverse, digging up each
version number...

OK, let's try
# aptitude install xserver-xorg-video-cirrus=1:1.5.3-1+b1

We will very likely encounter some
"The following actions will resolve these dependencies:

  Remove the following packages:"
questions which we will very probably answer "n", never reaching the
point where supposedly the forbid-version will be erased without
installing the package before quitting!

And, when you think about it
# aptitude install xserver-xorg-video-cirrus=
means the same as
# aptitude install xserver-xorg-video-cirrus
so if one didn't want to install the package one would answer "n" when
asked so never reaching the step where ... anyway one big no-op and the
forbid-version stays.

___
Aptitude-devel mailing list
Aptitude-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/aptitude-devel

[Aptitude-devel] Bug#819942: command line mode war against TERM=dumb

[積丹尼 Dan Jacobson]

Package: aptitude
Version: 0.7.8-1

I am using a emacs shell-mode window.

# aptitude install xserver-xorg-video-cirrus=1:1.5.3-1+b1
aptitude cannot run in ncurses mode with terminal type "dumb"

So must use:
# TERM=linux aptitude install xserver-xorg-video-cirrus=1:1.5.3-1+b1
# TERM= aptitude install xserver-xorg-video-cirrus=1:1.5.3-1+b1
# unset TERM; aptitude install xserver-xorg-video-cirrus=1:1.5.3-1+b1

You don't allow TERM=dumb (bug) but allow no TERM at all (fine).

$ TERM= aptitude
Error opening terminal: unknown.

That is fine.

But that is ncurses mode, and what I was doing wasn't.

___
Aptitude-devel mailing list
Aptitude-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/aptitude-devel

[Aptitude-devel] Bug#511366: closed by "Manuel A. Fernandez Montecelo" <manuel.montez...@gmail.com> (Re: Bug#511366: full-upgrade requires its piece of meat)

[積丹尼 Dan Jacobson]

OK good!

___
Aptitude-devel mailing list
Aptitude-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/aptitude-devel

[Aptitude-devel] Bug#497727: many commands append trailing blanks

[積丹尼 Dan Jacobson]

MAFM> I don't understand what's the harm in having some extra blanks, why it
MAFM> would be of any benefit to remove them, or why we should spend time
MAFM> tracking those cases that produce extra blanks.

One day they will bite you, pushing something where you never thought ...

___
Aptitude-devel mailing list
Aptitude-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/aptitude-devel

[Aptitude-devel] Bug#724032: I thought I said install // aptitude: "aptitude install" purges packages instead of updating them

[積丹尼 Dan Jacobson]

OK. I am still tying to figure out why phpmyadmin got marked
autoinstalled, and thus accidentally removed by me. But that is a
different adventure...

___
Aptitude-devel mailing list
Aptitude-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/aptitude-devel

[Aptitude-devel] Bug#691370: Maybe when a ^C is detected, print "Thank you for hitting ^C, but ..."

[積丹尼 Dan Jacobson]

Maybe when a ^C is detected, print "Thank you for hitting ^C, but ..."
or "^C detected, but ...".

___
Aptitude-devel mailing list
Aptitude-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/aptitude-devel

[Aptitude-devel] Bug#766122: thwarted due to missing partial/ directory that we aren't going to use anyway

[積丹尼 Dan Jacobson]

MAFM> - hopefully just by remounting the USB partition as RW would have
MAFM> worked (provided that it has permissions/space to create an empty
MAFM> partial/ dir, which is only a few KB)

MAFM> - same case as above, but creating the partial/ by hand, and then the
MAFM> partition can be remounted RO again,

MAFM> - copying those ~100MB of files to /somewhere/writable/ and point the
MAFM> above variables to it instead of /mnt/usb/extra1

E.g., optical read-only media, also some RO directory on a LAN. And with
not enough local disk space to (wastefully need to) copy all the files
(4.7GB perhaps, just to mkdir an empty partial/) to somewhere writeable.

MAFM> In short, there are many possible solutions less dramatic than having
MAFM> to buy a new USB :-)

MAFM> Anyway, got a way around this, so marking as +pending.
>> 
>> Hope it involves a new variable.

MAFM> No, it involves not trying to download when there's no need to (which
MAFM> implies extra actions from libapt like "setting up the directories,
MAFM> create partial if missing, etc").

MAFM> I was doubting whether it was worthy of implement this extra check to
MAFM> not download, since I think that this is relatively obscure
MAFM> corner-case and easily solvable.  But then I thought that might be
MAFM> useful in the case of emergency recoveries with external media mounted
MAFM> as RO, it's a small micro-optimisation for aptitude in itself, etc.

Well I hope that will cover all the cases when a partial/ cannot be
created.

And... it wouldn't hurt to have an extra APT variable anyway in addition
to your solution ... e.g., the user is downloading and writing the
archives to some "write-once" (think CD-ROM) media, but wants any
temporary work done elsewhere...

___
Aptitude-devel mailing list
Aptitude-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/aptitude-devel

[Aptitude-devel] Bug#766122: thwarted due to missing partial/ directory that we aren't going to use anyway

[積丹尼 Dan Jacobson]

> "MAFM" == Manuel A Fernandez Montecelo  
> writes:

>> E: Archives directory /mnt/usb/extra1/partial is missing. - Acquire (30: 
>> Read-only file system)

MAFM> ... or alternatively, if it's a knowledgeable user, it can occur to
MAFM> her/him to create a symlink/bind-mount/etc to somewhere writeable, like
MAFM> the /tmp/blah directory, to appease the stubborn program.

I think some variable
$ apt-config dump|grep -i partial
$
would be better, as for read-only media, one cannot create symlinks.
Also that bind stuff might not work on all version of linux etc.

MAFM> (BTW, it would help to have more descriptive titles, e.g. including
MAFM> words such as "download" or [parts of] the error message, so it's easier
MAFM> to find related bugs when people are looking into a particular area).

OK.

MAFM> Anyway, got a way around this, so marking as +pending.

Hope it involves a new variable.

___
Aptitude-devel mailing list
Aptitude-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/aptitude-devel

[Aptitude-devel] Bug#813546: loop when package is in "Bu" state and one tries to install it

[積丹尼 Dan Jacobson]

Package: aptitude
Version: 0.7.5-3

# aptitude install imagemagick
The following packages will be upgraded:
  imagemagick
The following packages will NOT be UPGRADED:
  libgdal1i  libssl1.0.2{a}  openssl{a}  xorg  xserver-xorg{a}
  xserver-xorg-core{a} (R: xserver-xorg)  xserver-xorg-input-evdev{a}
  xserver-xorg-input-kbd  xserver-xorg-input-mouse
  xserver-xorg-input-synaptics{a} (S: gpointing-device-settings, S: touchfreeze)
  xserver-xorg-input-vmmouse{a}  xserver-xorg-video-all
  xserver-xorg-video-ati{a}  xserver-xorg-video-cirrus{a}
  xserver-xorg-video-fbdev{a}  xserver-xorg-video-intel{a}
  xserver-xorg-video-mach64{a}  xserver-xorg-video-mga{a}
  xserver-xorg-video-neomagic{a}  xserver-xorg-video-nouveau{a}
  xserver-xorg-video-r128{a}  xserver-xorg-video-radeon{a}
  xserver-xorg-video-savage{a}  xserver-xorg-video-sisusb{a}
  xserver-xorg-video-tdfx  xserver-xorg-video-trident{a}
  xserver-xorg-video-vesa{a}  xserver-xorg-video-vmware{a}
1 packages upgraded, 0 newly installed, 0 to remove and 28 not upgraded.
Need to get 0 B/1,454 B of archives. After unpacking 236 kB will be freed.
Do you want to continue? [Y/n/?]
debconf: unable to initialize frontend: Dialog
debconf: (Dialog frontend will not work on a dumb terminal, an emacs shell 
buffer, or without a controlling terminal.)
debconf: falling back to frontend: Readline
(Reading database ... 180254 files and directories currently installed.)
Preparing to unpack .../imagemagick_8%3a6.9.2.10+dfsg-2_all.deb ...
dpkg-query: no packages found matching imagemagick:all
dpkg-query: package 'imagemagick' is not installed
Use dpkg --info (= dpkg-deb --info) to examine archive files,
and dpkg --contents (= dpkg-deb --contents) to list their contents.
dpkg-query: package 'imagemagick' is not installed
Use dpkg --info (= dpkg-deb --info) to examine archive files,
and dpkg --contents (= dpkg-deb --contents) to list their contents.

Repeats until kill -9

# aptitude search ~U
E: dpkg was interrupted, you must manually run 'dpkg --configure -a' to correct 
the problem.
W: Could not lock the cache file; this usually means that dpkg or another apt 
tool is already installing packages.  Opening in read-only mode; any changes 
you make to the states of packages will NOT be preserved!
Bu  imagemagick


Trying again
aptitude install imagemagick

Reading package lists...
Building dependency tree...
Reading state information...
Reading extended state information...
Initializing package states...
Building tag database...
Couldn't find any package whose name or description matched "imaagemagick"
Couldn't find any package whose name or description matched "imaagemagick"
The following packages will NOT be UPGRADED:
  imagemagick{b} (D: imagemagick-6.q16)  libgdal1i  libssl1.0.2{a}
  openssl{a}  xorg  xserver-xorg{a}
  xserver-xorg-core{a} (R: xserver-xorg)  xserver-xorg-input-evdev{a}
  xserver-xorg-input-kbd  xserver-xorg-input-mouse
  xserver-xorg-input-synaptics{a} (S: gpointing-device-settings, S: touchfreeze)
  xserver-xorg-input-vmmouse{a}  xserver-xorg-video-all
  xserver-xorg-video-ati{a}  xserver-xorg-video-cirrus{a}
  xserver-xorg-video-fbdev{a}  xserver-xorg-video-intel{a}
  xserver-xorg-video-mach64{a}  xserver-xorg-video-mga{a}
  xserver-xorg-video-neomagic{a}  xserver-xorg-video-nouveau{a}
  xserver-xorg-video-r128{a}  xserver-xorg-video-radeon{a}
  xserver-xorg-video-savage{a}  xserver-xorg-video-sisusb{a}
  xserver-xorg-video-tdfx  xserver-xorg-video-trident{a}
  xserver-xorg-video-vesa{a}  xserver-xorg-video-vmware{a}
No packages will be installed, upgraded, or removed.
0 packages upgraded, 0 newly installed, 0 to remove and 29 not upgraded.
Need to get 0 B of archives. After unpacking 0 B will be used.
The following packages have unmet dependencies:
 imagemagick : Depends: imagemagick-6.q16 (= 8:6.9.2.10+dfsg-1) but 
8:6.9.2.10+dfsg-2 is installed.
The following actions will resolve these dependencies:

 Remove the following packages:
1) imagemagick



Accept this solution? [Y/n/q/?] The following actions will resolve these 
dependencies:

 Upgrade the following packages:
1) imagemagick [8:6.9.2.10+dfsg-1 (experimental, now) -> 8:6.9.2.10+dfsg-2 (



Accept this solution? [Y/n/q/?] The following packages will be upgraded:
  imagemagick
The following packages will NOT be UPGRADED:
  libgdal1i  libssl1.0.2{a}  openssl{a}  xorg  xserver-xorg{a}
  xserver-xorg-core{a} (R: xserver-xorg)  xserver-xorg-input-evdev{a}
  xserver-xorg-input-kbd  xserver-xorg-input-mouse
  xserver-xorg-input-synaptics{a} (S: gpointing-device-settings, S: touchfreeze)
  xserver-xorg-input-vmmouse{a}  xserver-xorg-video-all
  xserver-xorg-video-ati{a}  xserver-xorg-video-cirrus{a}
  xserver-xorg-video-fbdev{a}  xserver-xorg-video-intel{a}
  xserver-xorg-video-mach64{a}  xserver-xorg-video-mga{a}
  xserver-xorg-video-neomagic{a}  xserver-xorg-video-nouveau{a}
  xserver-xorg-video-r128{a}  xserver-xorg-video-radeon{a}
  xserver-xorg-video-savage{a}  

[Aptitude-devel] Bug#812829: -o no longer works

[積丹尼 Dan Jacobson]

> "MAFM" == Manuel A Fernandez Montecelo  
> writes:

MAFM> -o is #1.

You're right! OK please change
> 1. Configuration file options specified on the command-line.
to
> 1. Configuration file options specified on the command-line (via -o).
so one notices it better.

MAFM> This is #587671, merging.

OK... or perhaps note on the man page at -o that it currently doesn't
work often.

___
Aptitude-devel mailing list
Aptitude-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/aptitude-devel

[Aptitude-devel] Bug#812829: -o no longer works

[積丹尼 Dan Jacobson]

Package: aptitude
Version: 0.7.5-3

file:///usr/share/doc/aptitude/html/en/ch02s05s05.html says

aptitude's configuration is read from the following sources, in order:

 1. Configuration file options specified on the command-line.

 2. The user's configuration file, ~/.aptitude/config. This file is overwritten 
when the user modifies settings in the Options menu.

 3. The system configuration file, /etc/apt/apt.conf.

 4. The system configuration fragment files, /etc/apt/apt.conf.d/*.

 5. The file specified by the APT_CONFIG environment variable (if any).

 6. Default values stored in /usr/share/aptitude/aptitude-defaults.

 7. Default values built into aptitude.

but neglects to mention at what level -o on the command line overrides
any of these. (DOCUMENTATION) BUG1. In fact it doesn't even politely
mention -o one little bit.

In fact it doesn't anymore.

The man page says

   -o =
   Set a configuration file option directly; for instance, use -o
   Aptitude::Log=/tmp/my-log to log aptitude's actions to /tmp/my-log.
   For more information on configuration file options, see the section
   "Configuration file reference" in the aptitude reference manual.

   -v, --verbose
   Causes some commands (for instance, show) to display extra
   information. This may be supplied multiple times to get more and
   more information.

   This corresponds to the configuration option
   Aptitude::CmdLine::Verbose.

So
# aptitude why python-requests
i   python-pip Depends python-requests
# aptitude -v why python-requests|wc
  56676  285614 3690866
# aptitude -o Aptitude::CmdLine::Verbose=1 why python-requests|wc
  1   4  39
BUG2.

Likewise, if one has
Aptitude::CmdLine::Verbose 1;
in their configuration file,
-o Aptitude::CmdLine::Verbose=0
will no longer turn it off.

Here we see that it must be an aptitude problem, not an apt problem:

# apt-config -o Aptitude::CmdLine::VerboseX=0 dump|grep -i verb
Aptitude::CmdLine::Verbose "1";
Aptitude::CmdLine::VerboseX "0";
CommandLine::AsString "apt-config -o Aptitude::CmdLine::VerboseX=0 dump";
# apt-config -o Aptitude::CmdLine::Verbose=0 dump|grep -i verb
Aptitude::CmdLine::Verbose "0";
CommandLine::AsString "apt-config -o Aptitude::CmdLine::Verbose=0 dump";

___
Aptitude-devel mailing list
Aptitude-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/aptitude-devel

[Aptitude-devel] Bug#810550: grammar and indentation of unmet dependencies message

[積丹尼 Dan Jacobson]

All I know is I would write that as
libghc-crypto-cipher-tests-dev:
  Depends: libghc-hunit-dev-1.2.5.2-0c3b7 which is a virtual package and is not 
provided by any available package.
  Depends: libghc-quickcheck-dev-2.7.6-8f38a which is a virtual package and is 
not provided by any available package.
  Depends: libghc-base-dev-4.7.0.2-94ad8 which is a virtual package and is not 
provided by any available package.

___
Aptitude-devel mailing list
Aptitude-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/aptitude-devel

[Aptitude-devel] Bug#810550: grammar and indentation of unmet dependencies message

[積丹尼 Dan Jacobson]

> "MAFM" == Manuel A Fernandez Montecelo  
> writes:

MAFM> Adding "which" would make it longer, contradictory with the previous
MAFM> request.

But reducing those 34 blanks to just 2 would more than pay for...

___
Aptitude-devel mailing list
Aptitude-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/aptitude-devel

[Aptitude-devel] Bug#810550: grammar and indentation of unmet dependencies message

[積丹尼 Dan Jacobson]

Package: aptitude
Version: 0.7.5-3
Severity: minor

$ aptitude install xserver-xorg-core
...
The following packages have unmet dependencies:
 xserver-xorg-video-fbdev : Depends: xorg-video-abi-19 which is a virtual 
package, provided by:
 - xserver-xorg-core (2:1.18.0-1) provides 
xorg-video-abi-19=2:1.17.3-2, but 2:1.18.0-1 is to be installed.

 xserver-xorg-input-kbd : Depends: xorg-input-abi-21 which is a virtual 
package, provided by:
   - xserver-xorg-core (2:1.18.0-1) provides 
xorg-input-abi-21=2:1.17.3-2, but 2:1.18.0-1 is to be installed.

 xserver-xorg-input-evdev : Depends: xorg-input-abi-21 which is a virtual 
package, provided by:
 - xserver-xorg-core (2:1.18.0-1) provides 
xorg-input-abi-21=2:1.17.3-2, but 2:1.18.0-1 is to be installed.

Problem 1: too much indentation. Wraps on many terminals. Try instead:

The following packages have unmet dependencies:
 xserver-xorg-video-fbdev : Depends: xorg-video-abi-19 which is a virtual 
package, provided by:
  - xserver-xorg-core (2:1.18.0-1) provides xorg-video-abi-19=2:1.17.3-2, but 
2:1.18.0-1 is to be installed.
 xserver-xorg-input-kbd : Depends: xorg-input-abi-21 which is a virtual 
package, provided by:
  - xserver-xorg-core (2:1.18.0-1) provides xorg-input-abi-21=2:1.17.3-2, but 
2:1.18.0-1 is to be installed.
 xserver-xorg-input-evdev : Depends: xorg-input-abi-21 which is a virtual 
package, provided by:
  - xserver-xorg-core (2:1.18.0-1) provides xorg-input-abi-21=2:1.17.3-2, but 
2:1.18.0-1 is to be installed.

There. That looks much better.

Problem 2. English:
Let's look at

xserver-xorg-video-fbdev : Depends: xorg-video-abi-19 which is a virtual 
package, provided by:
  - xserver-xorg-core (2:1.18.0-1) provides xorg-video-abi-19=2:1.17.3-2, but 
2:1.18.0-1 is to be installed.

 A : Depends: B which is a virtual package, provided by:
  - C provides D, but E is to be installed.

Maybe this means:

 A : Depends: B which is a virtual package, provided by:
  - C which provides D, but E is to be installed.

If so then please add the word "which".

If not then please reword it "so it at least passes a third grader's
grammar test!" Thanks!

___
Aptitude-devel mailing list
Aptitude-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/aptitude-devel

[Aptitude-devel] Bug#808905: forbid-version vs. "Do you want to continue? [Y/n/?]"

[積丹尼 Dan Jacobson]

Well OK. I think I have finally tamed it with all those options turned on.

___
Aptitude-devel mailing list
Aptitude-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/aptitude-devel

[Aptitude-devel] Bug#810057: closed by "Manuel A. Fernandez Montecelo" <manuel.montez...@gmail.com> (Re: aptitude -v show shows doubled information)

[積丹尼 Dan Jacobson]

B> In the example above, Archive is "now" and "unstable" because there's a
B> new version that one can upgrade to,

Even if it is the same version...
>> 2 Version: 0.999-3
Well OK then. I guess the other items make it different.

___
Aptitude-devel mailing list
Aptitude-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/aptitude-devel

[Aptitude-devel] Bug#808905: OK it doesn't forbid if you say "n"

[積丹尼 Dan Jacobson]

retitle 808905 Say instead "Will mark version XXX of package YYY as forbidden"
found 808905 0.7.5-3
thanks

Today with 0.7.5-3 I am happy to report that if one says "n"
aptitude indeed does not mark the versions as forbidden.

However this is still after the words
# aptitude forbid-version less
Marking version 481-1 of package less as forbidden

Therefore please change the wording to
Will mark version 481-1 of package less as forbidden

(Before finally asking Do you want to continue? [Y/n/?])

___
Aptitude-devel mailing list
Aptitude-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/aptitude-devel

[Aptitude-devel] Bug#810057: aptitude -v show shows doubled information

[積丹尼 Dan Jacobson]

Package: aptitude
Version: 0.7.5-3

Many lines are repeated, even for the same version!

# aptitude -v show xsane|sort|uniq -c|sort -n
  1 Archive: now <--OK maybe this is the big trigger / difference
  1 Archive: unstable
  1 Filename:
  1 Filename: pool/main/x/xsane/xsane_0.999-3_i386.deb
  1 MD5sum:
  1 MD5sum: 4911f91d49139d2c0819386b19ce3bdf
  2
  2
  2   mgetty-fax
  2  (>= 2.22.0), libgimp2.0 (>= 2.4.0), libglib2.0-0 (>= 2.16.0),
  2  1.14.0), libpangoft2-1.0-0 (>= 1.14.0), libpng12-0 (>= 
1.2.13-4),
  2  2.2+git20110628), libpango-1.0-0 (>= 1.14.0), 
libpangocairo-1.0-0 (>=
...
  2 State: installed
  2 Suggests: gimp, gocr | cuneiform | tesseract-ocr | ocrad, gv, 
hylafax-client |
  2 Tags: interface::x11, role::program, scope::application, uitoolkit::gtk,
  2 Uncompressed Size: 1,055 k
  2 Version: 0.999-3
# apt-config dump|grep -i apti
Aptitude "";
Aptitude::CmdLine "";
Aptitude::CmdLine::Always-Prompt "true";
Aptitude::CmdLine::Show-Why "true";
Aptitude::CmdLine::Show-Deps "true";
Aptitude::CmdLine::Verbose "1";
Aptitude::Purge-Unused "true";

___
Aptitude-devel mailing list
Aptitude-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/aptitude-devel

[Aptitude-devel] Bug#804103: no method to bulk unmark forbid-version

[積丹尼 Dan Jacobson]

Say one has
# aptitude search ~i|grep ^iF
iF  perl- Larry Wall's Practical Extraction and Repo
iF  perl-base   - minimal Perl system
iF  perl-doc- Perl documentation

Our goal today is to just remove the forbid-version marking, nothing
else.

Man page says

   forbid-version
   Forbid a package from being upgraded to a particular version. This
   will prevent aptitude from automatically upgrading to this version,
   but will allow automatic upgrades to future versions. By default,
   aptitude will select the version to which the package would
   normally be upgraded; you may override this selection by appending
   "=" to the package name: for instance, "aptitude
   forbid-version vim=1.2.3.broken-4".

   This command is useful for avoiding broken versions of packages
   without having to set and clear manual holds. If you decide you
   really want the forbidden version after all, "aptitude install
   " will remove the ban.

OK, we see there is no simple way to remove the forbid-version marking,
other than using the install command.

Well if one does
# aptitude install perl perl-base perl-doc
One might be met with one after another uncomfortable choices, all of
which one rejects, as they involve removing packages.

So now trying one at a time
# aptitude install perl
# aptitude install perl-doc
# aptitude install perl-base

We are still met with one after another dangerous choices,
finally reaching one that will just leave everything intact.

And indeed we finally reach our goal of just removing the forbidden
notation.

However it takes
* Manual intervention, whereas
# aptitude forbid-version perl perl-base perl-doc
didn't.
And
* many times more work. Also dangerous.

Therefor aptitude needs a unmarkforbid, just like unmarkauto.

___
Aptitude-devel mailing list
Aptitude-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/aptitude-devel

[Aptitude-devel] Bug#809347: mention try second identical run

[積丹尼 Dan Jacobson]

Package: aptitude
Version: 0.7.5-3
Severity: wishlist

Aptitude has a neat feature that I am not sure is documented on the man
page:

In the case that some of the packages cannot be retrieved, a second run
of aptitude will install the ones that can!

e.g., offline, with half the needed packages for a safe-upgrade already
in /var/cache/apt/archives, a first run of
# aptitude safe-upgrade
will get
42 packages upgraded, 27 newly installed, 12 to remove and 40 not upgraded.
Need to get 16.6 MB/33.0 MB of archives. After unpacking 5,960 kB will be used.
Do you want to continue? [Y/n/?]
E: Failed to fetch http://freei386.deb: Temporary failure resolving 
'free.nchc.org.tw'
E: Unable to correct for unavailable packages
Current status: 0 (+0) broken, 82 (+0) upgradable, 50004 (+0) new.

But a second identical run of
# aptitude safe-upgrade
will install the ones available, (and then at the end mention
E: Failed to fetch http://freei386.deb: Temporary failure resolving 
'free.nchc.org.tw'
Current status: 0 (+0) broken, 51 (-31) upgradable, 50004 (+0) new.
)

So perhaps on the man page mention that a second identical run of e.g.,
safe-upgrade, full-upgrade, will proceed to install available packages
that a first run couldn't.

And the "E: Unable to correct for unavailable packages" isn't then
entirely true, and should be changed to also mention "Try running me again...".

___
Aptitude-devel mailing list
Aptitude-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/aptitude-devel

[Aptitude-devel] Bug#809347: Bug#809347: mention try second identical run

[積丹尼 Dan Jacobson]

MAFM>  safe-upgrade && full-upgrade
MAFM>  ...

MAFM>  If no s are listed on the command line, aptitude will attempt
MAFM>  to upgrade every package that can be upgraded. Otherwise, aptitude
MAFM>  will attempt to upgrade only the packages which it is instructed to
MAFM>  upgrade. The s can be extended with suffixes in the same
MAFM>  manner as arguments to aptitude install, so you can also give
MAFM>  additional instructions to aptitude here; for instance, aptitude
MAFM>  safe-upgrade bash dash- will attempt to upgrade the bash package and
MAFM>  remove the dash package.

Well this should also mention how
# aptitude safe-upgrade
# aptitude safe-upgrade

or

# aptitude full-upgrade
# aptitude full-upgrade

will do more sometimes than just the single versions.
Because else the reader must somehow read between the lines to figure it
out.
It would be nice if all children would know that flushing the toilet
twice sometimes helps, but some will just give up after the first
failure.

Especially upon seeing
"E: Unable to correct for unavailable packages"
they might abandon hope. So maybe that should also say
"E: Unable to correct for unavailable packages. Maybe try running again..."

___
Aptitude-devel mailing list
Aptitude-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/aptitude-devel

[Aptitude-devel] Bug#808905: forbid-version vs. "Do you want to continue? [Y/n/?]"

[積丹尼 Dan Jacobson]

Package: aptitude
Version: 0.7.5-3
Severity: minor

Come to think of it, it is not entirely clear, when we get to
"Do you want to continue? [Y/n/?]"
if that means we are being asked if we are sure we want to forbid, or if
that has already been done.

# aptitude forbid-version perl perl-base perl-doc  xserver-xorg-core
Marking version 5.22.1-2 of package perl as forbidden
Marking version 5.22.1-2 of package perl-base as forbidden
Marking version 5.22.1-2 of package perl-doc as forbidden
Marking version 2:1.18.0-1 of package xserver-xorg-core as forbidden
Marking version 5.22.1-2 of package perl as forbidden
Marking version 5.22.1-2 of package perl-base as forbidden
Marking version 5.22.1-2 of package perl-doc as forbidden
Marking version 2:1.18.0-1 of package xserver-xorg-core as forbidden
The following packages will NOT be UPGRADED:
  kmod{a} (R: module-init-tools)  libapt-pkg-perl{a}  libcommon-sense-perl{a}  
libcurses-perl{a}
  libfile-fnmatch-perl{a}  libhtml-parser-perl{a} (S: libdata-dump-perl)  
libjson-xs-perl  libkmod2{a}
  liblocale-gettext-perl  libnet-dns-perl  libnet-ssleay-perl{a}  
libnetaddr-ip-perl  libsocket6-perl{a}
  libterm-readkey-perl{a}  libtext-charwidth-perl  libtext-iconv-perl  
libunicode-map8-perl
  libunicode-string-perl  libuuid-perl{a}  libversion-perl{a}  
libxml-libxml-perl  libyaml-syck-perl{a}
  perl  perl-base  perl-doc  xserver-xorg-core
No packages will be installed, upgraded, or removed.
0 packages upgraded, 0 newly installed, 0 to remove and 26 not upgraded.
Need to get 0 B of archives. After unpacking 0 B will be used.
Do you want to continue? [Y/n/?]

Current status: 0 (+0) broken, 26 (+0) upgradable, 12630 (+0) new.

Seen with
# apt-config dump|grep Aptitude
Aptitude "";
Aptitude::CmdLine "";
Aptitude::CmdLine::Always-Prompt "true";
Aptitude::CmdLine::Show-Why "true";
Aptitude::CmdLine::Show-Deps "true";
Aptitude::CmdLine::Verbose "1";
Aptitude::Purge-Unused "true";

We note "Marking version" double messages appear too, as reported elsewhere
by me.

___
Aptitude-devel mailing list
Aptitude-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/aptitude-devel

[Aptitude-devel] Bug#808575: maybe use $PAGER when showing choices in command line mode

[積丹尼 Dan Jacobson]

> "MAFM" == Manuel A Fernandez Montecelo  
> writes:

MAFM> I think that a better solution for cases like this would be to use
MAFM> --visual-preview.

MAFM> The formatting of information in that case is a bit better than with
MAFM> command line, and one can scroll up and down and fold subtrees, etc.

I just tried it and there I am back in the scary curses interface that I
have avoided for the last 15? years.

MAFM> Honouring $PAGER would be nice in general, but I think that aptitude
MAFM> already spawns too many processes to perform various tasks, and spawning
MAFM> processes as root is always dangerous (and circumventing that to use
MAFM> lower priviledges means quite a lot of work).

All I want to do is pipe it to less -F. A lot less fancy than the curses stuff.

OK then make it like journactl(1). That would be fine.

___
Aptitude-devel mailing list
Aptitude-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/aptitude-devel

[Aptitude-devel] Bug#808575: maybe use $PAGER when showing choices in command line mode

[積丹尼 Dan Jacobson]

Package: aptitude
Version: 0.7.5-3
Severity: wishlist

Got a problem here in command line mode.

  Upgrade the following packages:
7)  libapt-pkg-perl [0.1.29+b4 (now) -> 0.1.29+b5 (unstable)]
8)  libcairo-perl [1.106-1 (now) -> 1.106-1+b1 (unstable)]
9)  libcommon-sense-perl [3.74-1 (now) -> 3.74-1+b1 (unstable)]
...
38) libyaml-syck-perl [1.29-1 (now) -> 1.29-1+b1 (unstable)]
39) perl-tk [1:804.033-1 (now) -> 1:804.033-1+b1 (unstable)]



Accept this solution? [Y/n/q/?] **ALSO NOTE THE BIG 3 line gap above***

Well what about the first few? They have flown off my screen. So maybe
aptitude should honor PAGER?

The man page says

   PAGER
   If this environment variable is set, aptitude will use it to
   display changelogs when "aptitude changelog" is invoked. If not
   set, it defaults to more.

so maybe it should kick in optionally also in this case.

One notes one can still use less(1) $LESS with

   -F or --quit-if-one-screen
  Causes less to automatically exit if the entire file can be dis-
  played on the first screen.

___
Aptitude-devel mailing list
Aptitude-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/aptitude-devel

[Aptitude-devel] Bug#807098: don't ask "Do you want to continue? [Y/n/?]" if there is nothing to do

[積丹尼 Dan Jacobson]

I always get asked upon purge ~c, even when there's nothing to purge. Even when 
I do
# aptitude -o Aptitude::CmdLine::Always-Prompt=false purge ~c

# apt-config dump|grep Aptitude
Aptitude "";
Aptitude::CmdLine "";
Aptitude::CmdLine::Always-Prompt "true";
Aptitude::CmdLine::Show-Why "true";
Aptitude::CmdLine::Show-Deps "true";
Aptitude::CmdLine::Verbose "1";
Aptitude::Purge-Unused "true";

___
Aptitude-devel mailing list
Aptitude-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/aptitude-devel

[Aptitude-devel] Bug#807098: don't ask "Do you want to continue? [Y/n/?]" if there is nothing to do

[積丹尼 Dan Jacobson]

>>>>> "MAFM" == Manuel A Fernandez Montecelo <manuel.montez...@gmail.com> 
>>>>> writes:

MAFM> Hi,

MAFM> 2015-12-06 21:28 積丹尼 Dan Jacobson:
>> Here it always asks too:

MAFM> (missing part of the email, it seems)

Oh, I was referring to forbid-version below, sorry.

MAFM> I think that most of the whitespace happens because aptitude always
MAFM> works with columns.  --disable-columns in the command line probably will
MAFM> help you to get rid of most extra whitespace, but then it will not
MAFM> "tabulate" the fields in the rows.

OK I did aptitude --disable-columns full-upgrade but cat -e still shows

22) xserver-xorg-video-sisusb   $
23) xserver-xorg-video-trident  $
24) xserver-xorg-video-vesa $
25) xserver-xorg-video-vmware   $
$
$
$
Accept this solution? [Y/n/q/?] n$
The following actions will resolve these dependencies:$

Indeed, extra blank lines too. Note I always use the CLI version and
never the curses instance of aptitude.

MAFM> There's another bug report open about that, but whitespace in the
MAFM> current "columns" mode is quite likely to remain as it is, because it's
MAFM> a fundamental part of how aptitude output works.

MAFM> (I'm not sure why this is relevant for the current bug report, though).

Indeed I recall trailing blanks are a "wontfix" so I guess I won't pursue it 
further.

MAFM> I am not sure why you have the need to set this option to true,
MAFM> but in general and by default aptitude already almost always asks.

E.g., check with me with --download-only so I can be sure I'm ready for
the size.

MAFM> So for me Always-Prompt is a quite clear description, and has to do
MAFM> something more than the default "almost always prompt", because that's
MAFM> what aptitude already does anyway.

MAFM> There's also the possibility to use -y/--assume-yes, which (as
MAFM> documented in the man page) overrides
MAFM> -P/Aptitude::CmdLine::Always-Prompt set to true if you are really sure
MAFM> that you want to continue with an action no matter what, like the "purge
MAFM> ~c" -> "aptitude -y purge ~c".

-y: dangerous.

MAFM> Either that or pressing a single Enter in the relatively rare occasions
MAFM> when nothing needs to be done, doesn't look terribly inconvenient to me.

OK.

___
Aptitude-devel mailing list
Aptitude-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/aptitude-devel

[Aptitude-devel] Bug#807098: don't ask "Do you want to continue? [Y/n/?]" if there is nothing to do

[積丹尼 Dan Jacobson]

> "MAFM" == Manuel A Fernandez Montecelo  
> writes:

MAFM> What I meant is that in general, if you find yourself performing an
MAFM> action like "purge ~c" too often (which suggests that one actually
MAFM> doesn't care anymore about any cruft left behind), and too often also
MAFM> wants asks for confirmation to not do anything, it is a possible
MAFM> alternative.

Actually if
Aptitude::Purge-Unused "true";
always worked, then I wouldn't sometime need purge ~c.
But that's a different bug report...

___
Aptitude-devel mailing list
Aptitude-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/aptitude-devel

[Aptitude-devel] Bug#807098: don't ask "Do you want to continue? [Y/n/?]" if there is nothing to do

[積丹尼 Dan Jacobson]

Package: aptitude
Version: 0.7.4-2
Severity: wishlist

No big deal, but here aptitude knows to not ask us
"Do you want to continue? [Y/n/?]",

# aptitude full-upgrade
...
Accept this solution? [Y/n/q/?] n
The following actions will resolve these dependencies:

 Keep the following packages at their current version:
1) libperl5.22 [Not Installed]
2) perl [5.20.2-6 (now, unstable)]
3) perl-base [5.20.2-6 (now, unstable)]
4) perl-doc [5.20.2-6 (now, unstable)]
5) perl-modules-5.22 [Not Installed]
6) xserver-xorg-core [2:1.17.3-2 (now, unstable)]

Accept this solution? [Y/n/q/?]
No packages will be installed, upgraded, or removed.
0 packages upgraded, 0 newly installed, 0 to remove and 4 not upgraded.
Need to get 0 B of archives. After unpacking 0 B will be used.

Current status: 0 (+0) broken, 4 (+0) upgradable, 49736 (+0) new.
#

Where here, with the same
0 packages upgraded, 0 newly installed, 0 to remove and 4 not upgraded.
we are asked:

# aptitude purge ~c
No packages will be installed, upgraded, or removed.
0 packages upgraded, 0 newly installed, 0 to remove and 4 not upgraded.
Need to get 0 B of archives. After unpacking 0 B will be used.
Do you want to continue? [Y/n/?]

Current status: 0 (+0) broken, 4 (+0) upgradable, 49736 (+0) new.

#

So maybe it shouldn't ask in the latter case too.

___
Aptitude-devel mailing list
Aptitude-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/aptitude-devel

[Aptitude-devel] Bug#807076: I accept the final solution, but then it doesn't install anything

[積丹尼 Dan Jacobson]

> "MAFM" == Manuel A Fernandez Montecelo  
> writes:

MAFM> dependencies, it decides to not install python-samba either.  It does a
MAFM> suboptimal job at communicating this, though.

Yes it should at least say "oops, I can't do that either, sorry I didn't
figure it out before presenting it to you as an option."

___
Aptitude-devel mailing list
Aptitude-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/aptitude-devel

[Aptitude-devel] Bug#807076: I accept the final solution, but then it doesn't install anything

[積丹尼 Dan Jacobson]

Package: aptitude
Version: 0.7.4-2
File: /usr/bin/aptitude-curses

I accept the final solution, but then it doesn't install anything.

# aptitude full-upgrade
The following NEW packages will be installed:
  libhdb9-heimdal{a} (D: samba)  python-crypto{a} (D: python-samba)
  python-dnspython{a} (D: samba)  python-ldb{a} (D: python-samba)
  python-ntdb{a} (D: python-samba, D: samba)
  python-samba{a} (D: samba, D: samba-common-bin)
  python-tdb{a} (D: python-samba)
  samba{a} (D: python-samba, D: samba-common-bin, D: samba-libs)
  samba-common{a} (D: samba, D: samba-common-bin)
  samba-common-bin{a} (D: samba, R: samba-common)
  samba-dsdb-modules{a} (D: samba)  tdb-tools{a} (D: samba)
The following packages will be upgraded:
  libsmbclient  samba-libs{b} (D: libldb1)  xserver-xorg-core
The following packages are RECOMMENDED but will NOT be installed:
  attr (R: samba)  samba-vfs-modules (R: samba)
The following packages are SUGGESTED but will NOT be installed:
  bind9 (S: samba)  bind9utils (S: samba)  ctdb (S: samba)
  heimdal-clients (S: samba-common-bin)  ldb-tools (S: samba)
  python-crypto-dbg (S: python-crypto)
  python-crypto-doc (S: python-crypto)  smbldap-tools (S: samba)
  winbind (S: samba)
3 packages upgraded, 12 newly installed, 0 to remove and 3 not upgraded.
Need to get 12.7 MB/12.9 MB of archives. After unpacking 29.6 MB will be used.
The following packages have unmet dependencies:
 samba-libs : Depends: libldb1 (< 2:1.1.22~) but 2:1.1.23-1 is installed.
 xserver-xorg-video-vesa : Depends: xorg-video-abi-19 which is a virtual 
package, provided by:
 - xserver-xorg-core, but 2:1.18.0-1 is to 
be installed.
 xserver-xorg-video-fbdev : Depends: xorg-video-abi-19 which is a virtual 
package, provided by:
  - xserver-xorg-core, but 2:1.18.0-1 is to 
be installed.
 xserver-xorg-input-synaptics : Depends: xorg-input-abi-21 which is a virtual 
package, provided by:
  - xserver-xorg-core, but 2:1.18.0-1 
is to be installed.
 xserver-xorg-input-mouse : Depends: xorg-input-abi-21 which is a virtual 
package, provided by:
  - xserver-xorg-core, but 2:1.18.0-1 is to 
be installed.
 xserver-xorg-video-intel : Depends: xorg-video-abi-19 which is a virtual 
package, provided by:
  - xserver-xorg-core, but 2:1.18.0-1 is to 
be installed.
 xserver-xorg-input-evdev : Depends: xorg-input-abi-21 which is a virtual 
package, provided by:
  - xserver-xorg-core, but 2:1.18.0-1 is to 
be installed.
 xserver-xorg-input-kbd : Depends: xorg-input-abi-21 which is a virtual 
package, provided by:
- xserver-xorg-core, but 2:1.18.0-1 is to 
be installed.
The following actions will resolve these dependencies:

  Remove the following packages:
1)  libsmbclient
2)  mplayer
3)  samba-libs
4)  xorg
5)  xserver-xorg
6)  xserver-xorg-input-evdev
7)  xserver-xorg-input-kbd
8)  xserver-xorg-input-mouse
9)  xserver-xorg-input-synaptics
10) xserver-xorg-video-fbdev
11) xserver-xorg-video-intel
12) xserver-xorg-video-vesa

  Keep the following packages at their current version:
13) python-samba [Not Installed]
14) samba [Not Installed]
15) samba-common-bin [Not Installed]
16) samba-dsdb-modules [Not Installed]



Accept this solution? [Y/n/q/?] n
The following actions will resolve these dependencies:

 Keep the following packages at their current version:
1) libsmbclient [2:4.1.21+dfsg-2+b2 (now, unstable)]
2) python-samba [Not Installed]
3) samba [Not Installed]
4) samba-common-bin [Not Installed]
5) samba-dsdb-modules [Not Installed]
6) samba-libs [2:4.1.21+dfsg-2+b2 (now, unstable)]
7) xserver-xorg-core [2:1.17.3-2 (now, unstable)]



Accept this solution? [Y/n/q/?] n
The following actions will resolve these dependencies:

 Remove the following packages:
1) libsmbclient
2) mplayer

 Keep the following packages at their current version:
3) python-samba [Not Installed]
4) samba [Not Installed]
5) samba-common-bin [Not Installed]
6) samba-dsdb-modules [Not Installed]
7) samba-libs [2:4.1.21+dfsg-2+b2 (now, unstable)]
8) xserver-xorg-core [2:1.17.3-2 (now, unstable)]



Accept this solution? [Y/n/q/?] n
The following actions will resolve these dependencies:

 Remove the following packages:
1) libsmbclient
2) mplayer
3) samba-libs

 Keep the following packages at their current version:
4) python-samba [Not Installed]
5) samba [Not Installed]
6) samba-common-bin [Not Installed]
7) samba-dsdb-modules [Not Installed]
8) xserver-xorg-core [2:1.17.3-2 (now, unstable)]



Accept this solution? [Y/n/q/?] n
The following actions will resolve these dependencies:

  Remove the following packages:
1)  xorg

[Aptitude-devel] Bug#498442: say if %T refers to add-user-tag tags or make such an %escape

[積丹尼 Dan Jacobson]

OK! (But being seven years ago I usually no longer understand what I wrote.)

___
Aptitude-devel mailing list
Aptitude-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/aptitude-devel

[Aptitude-devel] Bug#764983: Bug#764983: reportbug --template aptitude misses vital configuration details

[積丹尼 Dan Jacobson]

Maybe print out a message: thank you for making this bug report. Now
please also run "" as root and append it to this report to provide
vital supplementary information.

___
Aptitude-devel mailing list
Aptitude-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/aptitude-devel

[Aptitude-devel] Bug#804287: acknowledge that one is really running in --download-only mode before asking user Y/n/?

[積丹尼 Dan Jacobson]

Package: aptitude
Version: 0.7.4-1
Severity: wishlist

# aptitude --download-only install $@
[ Download Only Mode. No installations etc. will actually be performed.] <- 
Please
add a line like that to the output, else the user worries that maybe
--download-only was ignored and the following will really take place:
The following NEW packages will be installed: ...
The following packages will be upgraded: ...
The following packages are RECOMMENDED but will NOT be installed: ...
The following packages are SUGGESTED but will NOT be installed: ...
1 packages upgraded, 1 newly installed, 0 to remove and 4 not upgraded.
Need to get 4,123 kB of archives. After unpacking 2,084 kB will be used.
Do you want to continue? [Y/n/?]

___
Aptitude-devel mailing list
Aptitude-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/aptitude-devel

[Aptitude-devel] Bug#799918: Bug#799918: apt-get proves I am innocent

[積丹尼 Dan Jacobson]

> "MAFM" == Manuel A Fernandez Montecelo  
> writes:

MAFM> stable and testing are supposed to be free of that (althought the big
MAFM> gcc-5/C++11 ABI transition affected testing as well, I think).
MAFM> unstable and experimental are not, because it is where the development
MAFM> happens.

OK. But I thought the first three were supposed to be free of that, that's
why they are listed separately on
https://www.debian.org/distrib/packages
and the fourth unlisted.

___
Aptitude-devel mailing list
Aptitude-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/aptitude-devel