Re: Can imagemagick really be safely purged or removed?
On Mon, 30 Oct 2017 23:13:33 +1300 Richard Hector wrote: > On 30/10/17 15:46, Celejar wrote: > > On Sun, 29 Oct 2017 08:28:46 -0400 > > The Wanderer wrote: > > > >> On 2017-10-29 at 07:49, Jörg-Volker Peetz wrote: > >> > >>> Celejar wrote on 10/24/17 15:09: > >>> > On Tue, 24 Oct 2017 08:52:46 +0200 > Jörg-Volker Peetz wrote: > > > I forgot that you showed the dependency on cups-filters in your > > original mail. > > On testing cups-filters 1.17.9-1 does not depend on imagemagick, it only > > recommends it. And I use APT::Install-Recommends "false"; in > > /etc/apt/apt.conf. > > Therefore, on this system imagemagick could be removed. > > Interesting, thanks. So they changed the dependency from 'depends' to > 'recommends', but they're still 'recommending' a dummy package. > >>> > >>> Taking another look at package imagemagick-6.q16 (version > >>> 8:6.9.7.4+dfsg-16) it > >>> states that it provides imagemagick. Therefore, I don't understand what's > >>> going > >>> on on your system and there's nothing wrong with package cups-filters, I > >>> think. > >> > >> My guess involves vague memories of there being an issue with versioned > >> Provides: - although I thought that was more "you can't Provides: a > >> specific version", not "a versioned Depends: won't be satisfied by a > >> Provides: from a package with a suitable version number". > > > > I don't understand this stuff well enough to add anything to the > > conversation. All I know is that I still can't remove imagemagick > > despite the fact that imagemagick-6.q16 "Provides:" imagemagick. > > > > Celejar > > > > imagemagick-6.q16 Provides: imagemagick, but not a specific version > > cups-filters Depends: imagemagick (>= 6.4~) > > The real imagemagick package is at 8:6.9.7.4+dfsg-11+deb9u1 (on my > machine anyway), which satisifies the cups-filters dependency. > > The system doesn't know whether the version of imagemagick Provided by > imagemagick-6.q16 is new enough, so you still need the real package. Ah, thank you. I couldn't find the whole Depends: / Provides: rules clearly documented anywhere, but that certainly explains it. So either imagemagick-6.q16 should be more specific about which version of imagemagick it "Provides:", or, if that's not possible (as per Wanderer's suggestion), then cups-filter needs the 'imagemagick' package, and it's not quite a dummy that can be removed. > Richard Celejar
Re: Can imagemagick really be safely purged or removed?
Jörg-Volker Peetz wrote on 10/30/17 15:54: > Richard Hector wrote on 10/30/17 11:13: > >> imagemagick-6.q16 Provides: imagemagick, but not a specific version >> >> cups-filters Depends: imagemagick (>= 6.4~) >> >> The real imagemagick package is at 8:6.9.7.4+dfsg-11+deb9u1 (on my >> machine anyway), which satisifies the cups-filters dependency. >> >> The system doesn't know whether the version of imagemagick Provided by >> imagemagick-6.q16 is new enough, so you still need the real package. >> >> Richard >> > So you would suggest a versioned "Provides:" for package imagemagick-6.q16? No, version 1.17.9-1 of cups-filters recommends imagemagick unversioned. Therefore, I recommend to update the cups-filters package to get rid of the dummy imagemagick package. Regards, jvp.
Re: Can imagemagick really be safely purged or removed?
Richard Hector wrote on 10/30/17 11:13: > imagemagick-6.q16 Provides: imagemagick, but not a specific version > > cups-filters Depends: imagemagick (>= 6.4~) > > The real imagemagick package is at 8:6.9.7.4+dfsg-11+deb9u1 (on my > machine anyway), which satisifies the cups-filters dependency. > > The system doesn't know whether the version of imagemagick Provided by > imagemagick-6.q16 is new enough, so you still need the real package. > > Richard > So you would suggest a versioned "Provides:" for package imagemagick-6.q16? Regards, jvp.
Re: Can imagemagick really be safely purged or removed?
On 30/10/17 15:46, Celejar wrote: > On Sun, 29 Oct 2017 08:28:46 -0400 > The Wanderer wrote: > >> On 2017-10-29 at 07:49, Jörg-Volker Peetz wrote: >> >>> Celejar wrote on 10/24/17 15:09: >>> On Tue, 24 Oct 2017 08:52:46 +0200 Jörg-Volker Peetz wrote: > I forgot that you showed the dependency on cups-filters in your original > mail. > On testing cups-filters 1.17.9-1 does not depend on imagemagick, it only > recommends it. And I use APT::Install-Recommends "false"; in > /etc/apt/apt.conf. > Therefore, on this system imagemagick could be removed. Interesting, thanks. So they changed the dependency from 'depends' to 'recommends', but they're still 'recommending' a dummy package. >>> >>> Taking another look at package imagemagick-6.q16 (version >>> 8:6.9.7.4+dfsg-16) it >>> states that it provides imagemagick. Therefore, I don't understand what's >>> going >>> on on your system and there's nothing wrong with package cups-filters, I >>> think. >> >> My guess involves vague memories of there being an issue with versioned >> Provides: - although I thought that was more "you can't Provides: a >> specific version", not "a versioned Depends: won't be satisfied by a >> Provides: from a package with a suitable version number". > > I don't understand this stuff well enough to add anything to the > conversation. All I know is that I still can't remove imagemagick > despite the fact that imagemagick-6.q16 "Provides:" imagemagick. > > Celejar > imagemagick-6.q16 Provides: imagemagick, but not a specific version cups-filters Depends: imagemagick (>= 6.4~) The real imagemagick package is at 8:6.9.7.4+dfsg-11+deb9u1 (on my machine anyway), which satisifies the cups-filters dependency. The system doesn't know whether the version of imagemagick Provided by imagemagick-6.q16 is new enough, so you still need the real package. Richard signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: Can imagemagick really be safely purged or removed?
On Sun, 29 Oct 2017 08:28:46 -0400 The Wanderer wrote: > On 2017-10-29 at 07:49, Jörg-Volker Peetz wrote: > > > Celejar wrote on 10/24/17 15:09: > > > >> On Tue, 24 Oct 2017 08:52:46 +0200 > >> Jörg-Volker Peetz wrote: > >> > >>> I forgot that you showed the dependency on cups-filters in your original > >>> mail. > >>> On testing cups-filters 1.17.9-1 does not depend on imagemagick, it only > >>> recommends it. And I use APT::Install-Recommends "false"; in > >>> /etc/apt/apt.conf. > >>> Therefore, on this system imagemagick could be removed. > >> > >> Interesting, thanks. So they changed the dependency from 'depends' to > >> 'recommends', but they're still 'recommending' a dummy package. > > > > Taking another look at package imagemagick-6.q16 (version > > 8:6.9.7.4+dfsg-16) it > > states that it provides imagemagick. Therefore, I don't understand what's > > going > > on on your system and there's nothing wrong with package cups-filters, I > > think. > > My guess involves vague memories of there being an issue with versioned > Provides: - although I thought that was more "you can't Provides: a > specific version", not "a versioned Depends: won't be satisfied by a > Provides: from a package with a suitable version number". I don't understand this stuff well enough to add anything to the conversation. All I know is that I still can't remove imagemagick despite the fact that imagemagick-6.q16 "Provides:" imagemagick. Celejar
Re: Can imagemagick really be safely purged or removed?
On 2017-10-29 at 07:49, Jörg-Volker Peetz wrote: > Celejar wrote on 10/24/17 15:09: > >> On Tue, 24 Oct 2017 08:52:46 +0200 >> Jörg-Volker Peetz wrote: >> >>> I forgot that you showed the dependency on cups-filters in your original >>> mail. >>> On testing cups-filters 1.17.9-1 does not depend on imagemagick, it only >>> recommends it. And I use APT::Install-Recommends "false"; in >>> /etc/apt/apt.conf. >>> Therefore, on this system imagemagick could be removed. >> >> Interesting, thanks. So they changed the dependency from 'depends' to >> 'recommends', but they're still 'recommending' a dummy package. > > Taking another look at package imagemagick-6.q16 (version 8:6.9.7.4+dfsg-16) > it > states that it provides imagemagick. Therefore, I don't understand what's > going > on on your system and there's nothing wrong with package cups-filters, I > think. My guess involves vague memories of there being an issue with versioned Provides: - although I thought that was more "you can't Provides: a specific version", not "a versioned Depends: won't be satisfied by a Provides: from a package with a suitable version number". -- The Wanderer The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man. -- George Bernard Shaw signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: Can imagemagick really be safely purged or removed?
Celejar wrote on 10/24/17 15:09: > On Tue, 24 Oct 2017 08:52:46 +0200 > Jörg-Volker Peetz wrote: > >> I forgot that you showed the dependency on cups-filters in your original >> mail. >> On testing cups-filters 1.17.9-1 does not depend on imagemagick, it only >> recommends it. And I use APT::Install-Recommends "false"; in >> /etc/apt/apt.conf. >> Therefore, on this system imagemagick could be removed. > > Interesting, thanks. So they changed the dependency from 'depends' to > 'recommends', but they're still 'recommending' a dummy package. Taking another look at package imagemagick-6.q16 (version 8:6.9.7.4+dfsg-16) it states that it provides imagemagick. Therefore, I don't understand what's going on on your system and there's nothing wrong with package cups-filters, I think. Regards, jvp.
Re: Can imagemagick really be safely purged or removed?
On Sat, 21 Oct 2017 16:34:23 +0100 Roger Lynn wrote: > On 20/10/17 05:00, Celejar wrote: > > The description of the imagemagick package (8:6.9.7.4+dfsg-11+deb9u1) > > on my Stable system includes the statements: > > > > "This is a dummy package. You can safely purge or remove it." > > > > But trying to remove it rips out cups, because: > > > > ~$ aptitude why imagemagick > > i cups Depends cups-filters (>= 1.0.24-3~) > > i A cups-filters Depends imagemagick (>= 6.4~) > > > > What gives? > > imagemagick can only be removed when nothing depends on it. > imagemagick-6.q16 has been marked as replacing imagemagick, so most packages > which depend on imagemagick will automatically use imagemagick-6.q16. > However some packages, including cups-filters, depend on particular versions > of imagemagick and the automatic replacement doesn't appear to work in this > case. > > You will only be able to remove imagemagick when cups-filters' dependencies > are updated or imagemagick-6.q16 finds a better way of declaring that it > provides imagemagick. > > The :386 packages are irrelevant and only need installing in very specific > circumstances. Thanks for the explanation. So this is basically a bug in cups-filter, which is insisting that it depends on a dummy package when it really doesn't? Celejar
Re: Can imagemagick really be safely purged or removed?
On Tue, 24 Oct 2017 08:52:46 +0200 Jörg-Volker Peetz wrote: > I forgot that you showed the dependency on cups-filters in your original mail. > On testing cups-filters 1.17.9-1 does not depend on imagemagick, it only > recommends it. And I use APT::Install-Recommends "false"; in > /etc/apt/apt.conf. > Therefore, on this system imagemagick could be removed. Interesting, thanks. So they changed the dependency from 'depends' to 'recommends', but they're still 'recommending' a dummy package. Celejar
Re: Can imagemagick really be safely purged or removed?
I forgot that you showed the dependency on cups-filters in your original mail. On testing cups-filters 1.17.9-1 does not depend on imagemagick, it only recommends it. And I use APT::Install-Recommends "false"; in /etc/apt/apt.conf. Therefore, on this system imagemagick could be removed. Regards, jvp.
Re: Can imagemagick really be safely purged or removed?
On Mon, 23 Oct 2017 20:09:59 -0400 The Wanderer wrote: > On 2017-10-23 at 19:24, Celejar wrote: > > > On Mon, 23 Oct 2017 20:23:46 +0100 Roger Lynn > > wrote: > > > >> On 23/10/17 11:00, Jörg-Volker Peetz wrote: > >> > >>> Since I use a pure 64-bit system, I overlooked that only one of > >>> imagemagick-6.q16 or imagemagick-6.q16:i386 can be installed. I > >>> think it's better to re-install imagemagick-6.q16. And then show > >>> the output when trying to purge imagemagick, please. I think > >>> there must be involved a i386 version of some cups package. > >> > >> Celejar answered the question in the first post. It's very simple: > >> imagemagick can not be removed because cups-filters depends on it. > > > > Okay, but why do packages depend on other packages that declare that > > they are dummies and can be safely removed? Is this a bug in the > > dummy package' description, or in the package that has the > > dependency, or just unclear / misleading terminology? > > Generally (though perhaps not universally), the dummy package was not > originally a dummy, but was split out into two or more separate packages > and now exists only to aid the transition to those new packages. > > In other words, it's usually for historical reasons. > > Failures like the one you're looking at crop up when other packages > haven't yet been updated to depend on the new packages instead of the > old one. So should I file a bug against the other packages? Celejar
Re: Can imagemagick really be safely purged or removed?
On 10/23/2017 06:24 PM, Celejar wrote: On Mon, 23 Oct 2017 20:23:46 +0100 Roger Lynn wrote: On 23/10/17 11:00, Jörg-Volker Peetz wrote: Since I use a pure 64-bit system, I overlooked that only one of imagemagick-6.q16 or imagemagick-6.q16:i386 can be installed. I think it's better to re-install imagemagick-6.q16. And then show the output when trying to purge imagemagick, please. I think there must be involved a i386 version of some cups package. Celejar answered the question in the first post. It's very simple: imagemagick can not be removed because cups-filters depends on it. Okay, but why do packages depend on other packages that declare that they are dummies and can be safely removed? Is this a bug in the dummy package' description, or in the package that has the dependency, or just unclear / misleading terminology? Celejar Isn't this a consequence of systemd? --doug
Re: Can imagemagick really be safely purged or removed?
On 2017-10-23 at 19:24, Celejar wrote: > On Mon, 23 Oct 2017 20:23:46 +0100 Roger Lynn > wrote: > >> On 23/10/17 11:00, Jörg-Volker Peetz wrote: >> >>> Since I use a pure 64-bit system, I overlooked that only one of >>> imagemagick-6.q16 or imagemagick-6.q16:i386 can be installed. I >>> think it's better to re-install imagemagick-6.q16. And then show >>> the output when trying to purge imagemagick, please. I think >>> there must be involved a i386 version of some cups package. >> >> Celejar answered the question in the first post. It's very simple: >> imagemagick can not be removed because cups-filters depends on it. > > Okay, but why do packages depend on other packages that declare that > they are dummies and can be safely removed? Is this a bug in the > dummy package' description, or in the package that has the > dependency, or just unclear / misleading terminology? Generally (though perhaps not universally), the dummy package was not originally a dummy, but was split out into two or more separate packages and now exists only to aid the transition to those new packages. In other words, it's usually for historical reasons. Failures like the one you're looking at crop up when other packages haven't yet been updated to depend on the new packages instead of the old one. -- The Wanderer The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man. -- George Bernard Shaw signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: Can imagemagick really be safely purged or removed?
On Mon, 23 Oct 2017 20:23:46 +0100 Roger Lynn wrote: > On 23/10/17 11:00, Jörg-Volker Peetz wrote: > > Since I use a pure 64-bit system, I overlooked that only one of > > imagemagick-6.q16 or imagemagick-6.q16:i386 can be installed. > > I think it's better to re-install imagemagick-6.q16. > > And then show the output when trying to purge imagemagick, please. > > I think there must be involved a i386 version of some cups package. > > Celejar answered the question in the first post. It's very simple: > imagemagick can not be removed because cups-filters depends on it. Okay, but why do packages depend on other packages that declare that they are dummies and can be safely removed? Is this a bug in the dummy package' description, or in the package that has the dependency, or just unclear / misleading terminology? Celejar
Re: Can imagemagick really be safely purged or removed?
On Mon, 23 Oct 2017 11:58:53 +0200 Jörg-Volker Peetz wrote: > Since I use a pure 64-bit system, I overlooked that only one of > imagemagick-6.q16 or imagemagick-6.q16:i386 can be installed. > I think it's better to re-install imagemagick-6.q16. Done. > And then show the output when trying to purge imagemagick, please. > I think there must be involved a i386 version of some cups package. Thanks for helping me to try to figure this out. ~# aptitude remove imagemagick The following packages will be REMOVED: imagemagick 0 packages upgraded, 0 newly installed, 1 to remove and 0 not upgraded. Need to get 0 B of archives. After unpacking 199 kB will be freed. The following packages have unmet dependencies: cups-filters : Depends: imagemagick (>= 6.4~) but it is not going to be installed The following actions will resolve these dependencies: Install the following packages: 1) imagemagick:i386 [8:6.9.7.4+dfsg-11+deb9u1 (stable)] Celejar
Re: Can imagemagick really be safely purged or removed?
On 23/10/17 11:00, Jörg-Volker Peetz wrote: > Since I use a pure 64-bit system, I overlooked that only one of > imagemagick-6.q16 or imagemagick-6.q16:i386 can be installed. > I think it's better to re-install imagemagick-6.q16. > And then show the output when trying to purge imagemagick, please. > I think there must be involved a i386 version of some cups package. Celejar answered the question in the first post. It's very simple: imagemagick can not be removed because cups-filters depends on it. Roger
Re: Can imagemagick really be safely purged or removed?
Since I use a pure 64-bit system, I overlooked that only one of imagemagick-6.q16 or imagemagick-6.q16:i386 can be installed. I think it's better to re-install imagemagick-6.q16. And then show the output when trying to purge imagemagick, please. I think there must be involved a i386 version of some cups package. Regards, jvp.
Re: Can imagemagick really be safely purged or removed?
On Fri, 20 Oct 2017 23:22:55 +0200 Jörg-Volker Peetz wrote: > Celejar wrote on 10/20/17 19:05: > > Thanks. Okay, I did that, and I was then able to remove imagemagick, > but > only > > if imagemagick:i386 is installed instead - and that's also marked as a > > dummy package that can be safely removed or purged. > > > > At this point: > > > > ~$ aptitude search '~iimagemagick' > > idA imagemagick:i386 - > > image manipulation programs -- binaries > > > > i A imagemagick-6-common - > > image manipulation programs -- infrastructure > > > > i imagemagick-6.q16 - > > image manipulation programs -- quantum depth Q16 > > > > Celejar > > > > > Package imagemagick:i386 is to be replaced by imagemagick-6.q16:i386. > Try to install that. Okay - I've installed imagemagick-6.q16:i386, but I still can't remove dummy package 'imagemagick' without either installing dummy package 'imagemagick:i386' or removing cups. Currently: aptitude search '~iimagemagick' i A imagemagick- image manipulation programs -- binaries i A imagemagick-6-common - image manipulation programs -- infrastructure i A imagemagick-6.q16:i386 - image manipulation programs -- quantum depth Q16 Celejar
Re: Can imagemagick really be safely purged or removed?
On 20/10/17 05:00, Celejar wrote: > The description of the imagemagick package (8:6.9.7.4+dfsg-11+deb9u1) > on my Stable system includes the statements: > > "This is a dummy package. You can safely purge or remove it." > > But trying to remove it rips out cups, because: > > ~$ aptitude why imagemagick > i cups Depends cups-filters (>= 1.0.24-3~) > i A cups-filters Depends imagemagick (>= 6.4~) > > What gives? imagemagick can only be removed when nothing depends on it. imagemagick-6.q16 has been marked as replacing imagemagick, so most packages which depend on imagemagick will automatically use imagemagick-6.q16. However some packages, including cups-filters, depend on particular versions of imagemagick and the automatic replacement doesn't appear to work in this case. You will only be able to remove imagemagick when cups-filters' dependencies are updated or imagemagick-6.q16 finds a better way of declaring that it provides imagemagick. The :386 packages are irrelevant and only need installing in very specific circumstances. Roger
Re: Can imagemagick really be safely purged or removed?
Celejar wrote on 10/20/17 19:05: > Thanks. Okay, I did that, and I was then able to remove imagemagick, but only > if imagemagick:i386 is installed instead - and that's also marked as a > dummy package that can be safely removed or purged. > > At this point: > > ~$ aptitude search '~iimagemagick' > idA imagemagick:i386 - > image manipulation programs -- binaries > i A imagemagick-6-common - > image manipulation programs -- infrastructure > i imagemagick-6.q16 - > image manipulation programs -- quantum depth Q16 > > Celejar > > Package imagemagick:i386 is to be replaced by imagemagick-6.q16:i386. Try to install that. Regards, jvp.
Re: Can imagemagick really be safely purged or removed?
On Fri, 20 Oct 2017 10:21:24 +0200 Jörg-Volker Peetz wrote: > Take a look which imagemagick packages are installed: > > $ aptitude search '~iimagemagick' > > Probably there is a line beginning with > > i A imagemagick-6.q16 > > which shall replace imagemagick. Also see the dependencies of package > imagemagick: > > $ dpkg -s imagemagick > > So before purging imagemagick you have to > > $ aptitude unmarkauto imagemagick-6.q16 Thanks. Okay, I did that, and I was then able to remove imagemagick, but only if imagemagick:i386 is installed instead - and that's also marked as a dummy package that can be safely removed or purged. At this point: ~$ aptitude search '~iimagemagick' idA imagemagick:i386 - image manipulation programs -- binaries i A imagemagick-6-common - image manipulation programs -- infrastructure i imagemagick-6.q16 - image manipulation programs -- quantum depth Q16 Celejar
Re: Can imagemagick really be safely purged or removed?
Take a look which imagemagick packages are installed: $ aptitude search '~iimagemagick' Probably there is a line beginning with i A imagemagick-6.q16 which shall replace imagemagick. Also see the dependencies of package imagemagick: $ dpkg -s imagemagick So before purging imagemagick you have to $ aptitude unmarkauto imagemagick-6.q16 Regards, jvp.
