Le 30/05/2024, "Thomas Schmitt" <scdbac...@gmx.net> a écrit:
> So "local" would be just another word for "obsolete" ?
My understanding is that “obsolete” and “local” may mean different
things to the person who installed the packages (“obsolete” would
correspond to the first item of the list at the end of my previous post,
“local” to the second one); however, apt and aptitude can't distinguish
between them: both categories are comprised of “packages that are
installed but not available from the sources scanned during the last
'apt update' run (or 'aptitude update').
I believe someone already wrote something along these lines in this
thread (maybe Max). In aptitude, the packages in question are all
grouped in the category named “Obsolete and Locally Created Packages”,
IMHO because there is no good way to programmatically distinguish
between them.
(A private package could very well be made available and installed from
a private repository; or alternatively, installed with 'dpkg -i' without
ever being put in an apt repository; therefore “has been installed in
the past from an apt repository” is not a good criterion to distinguish
between “obsolete packages” and “local” ones.)
Note: I mentioned private packages to simplify wording, but the
“Obsolete and Locally Created Packages” category would also
contain packages that users sometimes download from third-party
websites[1], installing them with 'dpkg -i' or the 'apt' command
line tool, without adding any repository to their
sources.list(.d). All these are “local packages” from my POV.
Regards
[1] Printer drivers in .deb form, libdvdcss stuff, etc. (make sure the
source is trustworthy!)
--
Florent
