Your message dated Thu, 24 Jul 2025 01:34:19 +0200 with message-id <[email protected]> and subject line Re: Bug#987017: release-notes: Giving many ways to do something *is* useful has caused the Debian Bug report #987017, regarding recommends 3 different ways to find obsolete packages, pick one to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with. If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith. (NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact [email protected] immediately.) -- 987017: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=987017 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact [email protected] with problems
--- Begin Message ---Package: release-notes Severity: minor The release notes, in sections 4.2.2 and 4.8, actually suggest *three* *different* ways of finding what are essential orphaned packages: aptitude search '~o' aptitude search '?narrow(?installed, ?not(?origin(Debian)))' apt-forktracer | sort Then I also know of those: apt-show-versions | grep -v /bullseye aptitude search '?narrow(?installed, ?not(?origin(Debian)))' aptitude search '?narrow(?not(?archive("^[^n][^o][^w].*$")),?version(CURRENT))' I frankly don't quite know where I stand with all this anymore, but I am getting the strong feeling we're sending an incoherent message here. :) In my personal documentation, I've settled on `apt-forktracer`, but I suspect we might want to stick with `aptitude search '~obsolete'` because that matches other documentation in the release notes (and allows for easy purging). Is there any reason why we have all that diversity? What's the right way to do what we actually want here? -- System Information: Debian Release: 10.9 APT prefers stable-debug APT policy: (500, 'stable-debug'), (500, 'stable'), (1, 'experimental'), (1, 'unstable'), (1, 'testing') Architecture: amd64 (x86_64) Foreign Architectures: i386 Kernel: Linux 4.19.0-16-amd64 (SMP w/4 CPU cores) Locale: LANG=fr_CA.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=fr_CA.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8), LANGUAGE=fr_CA.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8) Shell: /bin/sh linked to /usr/bin/dash Init: systemd (via /run/systemd/system) LSM: AppArmor: enabled
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---On Mon, Dec 23, 2024 at 07:24:17PM +0000, R Lewis wrote: > Did i miss anything or should we close this bug? Lets close it, then. One day APT will get better support for removing cruft, then this can be revisited. Chris
--- End Message ---
