Re: apt-get upgrade: packages have been kept back
Yes that totally makes sense, I was actually reading the man page but I did not understand what was the big difference in my case with the OpenJDK packages. I only saw that it had to install an additional and new package, maybe that made it classify more for a dist-upgrade. Because else it was supposed to be a security upgrade so in theory there shouldn't be any wild modifications. On Tuesday, April 21, 2015 12:21 PM, Patrick Weiden wrote: Hi, as the manpage of apt-get tells: [...] upgrade upgrade is used to install the newest versions of all packages currently installed on the system from the sources enumerated in /etc/apt/sources.list. Packages currently installed with new versions available are retrieved and upgraded; under no circumstances are currently installed packages removed, or packages not already installed retrieved and installed. **New versions of currently installed packages that cannot be upgraded without changing the install status of another package will be left at their current version.** An update must be performed first so that apt-get knows that new versions of packages are available. dist-upgrade dist-upgrade in addition to performing the function of upgrade, also intelligently handles changing dependencies with new versions of packages; apt-get has a "smart" conflict resolution system, and it will attempt to upgrade the most important packages at the expense of less important ones if necessary. The dist-upgrade command may therefore remove some packages. The /etc/apt/sources.list file contains a list of locations from which to retrieve desired package files. See also apt_preferences(5) for a mechanism for overriding the general settings for individual packages. [...] I have marked the - in my opinion - important and interesting sentence inside the "upgrade" part with two stars, which should be applying here. I hope this helps. Best regards, Patrick On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 11:59 AM, ML mail wrote: Hi Patrick dist-upgrade did it. Now as a general rule is it safe to use a dist-upgrade in a production environment? I suppose there is a good reason for having upgrade and dist-upgrade. Regards ML On Tuesday, April 21, 2015 11:39 AM, Patrick Weiden wrote: Hi, have you tried an "apt-get dist-upgrade"? Some packages won't be upgraded by the "apt-get upgrade" operation. Please try the first and tell us the results. Thanks! Cheers, Patrick On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 11:26 AM, ML mail wrote: Hi, > >I was wondering why an "apt-get upgrade"on my Debian wheezy box does not want >to update the OpenJDK packages as you can see below: > > >shell$ apt-get upgrade > > >Reading package lists... Done >Building dependency tree >Reading state information... Done >The following packages have been kept back: >icedtea-6-jre-cacao icedtea-6-jre-jamvm openjdk-6-jre openjdk-6-jre-headless >openjdk-6-jre-lib >0 upgraded, 0 newly installed, 0 to remove and 5 not upgraded. > >Anyone has an idea why they are all kept back? Is something broken on my side >maybe? > >Regards >ML > > >-- >To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org >with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org >Archive: >https://lists.debian.org/947300723.1245321.1429608381379.javamail.ya...@mail.yahoo.com > > -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/1448263282.1248593.1429610360116.javamail.ya...@mail.yahoo.com
Re: apt-get upgrade: packages have been kept back
Hi, as the manpage of apt-get tells: [...] upgrade upgrade is used to install the newest versions of all packages currently installed on the system from the sources enumerated in /etc/apt/sources.list. Packages currently installed with new versions available are retrieved and upgraded; under no circumstances are currently installed packages removed, or packages not already installed retrieved and installed. **New versions of currently installed packages that cannot be upgraded without changing the install status of another package will be left at their current version.** An update must be performed first so that apt-get knows that new versions of packages are available. dist-upgrade dist-upgrade in addition to performing the function of upgrade, also intelligently handles changing dependencies with new versions of packages; apt-get has a "smart" conflict resolution system, and it will attempt to upgrade the most important packages at the expense of less important ones if necessary. The dist-upgrade command may therefore remove some packages. The /etc/apt/sources.list file contains a list of locations from which to retrieve desired package files. See also apt_preferences(5) for a mechanism for overriding the general settings for individual packages. [...] I have marked the - in my opinion - important and interesting sentence inside the "upgrade" part with two stars, which should be applying here. I hope this helps. Best regards, Patrick On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 11:59 AM, ML mail wrote: > Hi Patrick > > > dist-upgrade did it. Now as a general rule is it safe to use a > dist-upgrade in a production environment? I suppose there is a good reason > for having upgrade and dist-upgrade. > > Regards > ML > > > On Tuesday, April 21, 2015 11:39 AM, Patrick Weiden > wrote: > > > > Hi, > > have you tried an "apt-get dist-upgrade"? > Some packages won't be upgraded by the "apt-get upgrade" operation. Please > try the first and tell us the results. Thanks! > > Cheers, > Patrick > > > > > On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 11:26 AM, ML mail wrote: > > Hi, > > > >I was wondering why an "apt-get upgrade"on my Debian wheezy box does not > want to update the OpenJDK packages as you can see below: > > > > > >shell$ apt-get upgrade > > > > > >Reading package lists... Done > >Building dependency tree > >Reading state information... Done > >The following packages have been kept back: > >icedtea-6-jre-cacao icedtea-6-jre-jamvm openjdk-6-jre > openjdk-6-jre-headless openjdk-6-jre-lib > >0 upgraded, 0 newly installed, 0 to remove and 5 not upgraded. > > > >Anyone has an idea why they are all kept back? Is something broken on my > side maybe? > > > >Regards > >ML > > > > > >-- > >To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org > >with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact > listmas...@lists.debian.org > >Archive: > https://lists.debian.org/947300723.1245321.1429608381379.javamail.ya...@mail.yahoo.com > > > > > > > -- > To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org > with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact > listmas...@lists.debian.org > Archive: > https://lists.debian.org/1448263282.1248593.1429610360116.javamail.ya...@mail.yahoo.com > >
Re: apt-get upgrade: packages have been kept back
Hi Patrick dist-upgrade did it. Now as a general rule is it safe to use a dist-upgrade in a production environment? I suppose there is a good reason for having upgrade and dist-upgrade. Regards ML On Tuesday, April 21, 2015 11:39 AM, Patrick Weiden wrote: Hi, have you tried an "apt-get dist-upgrade"? Some packages won't be upgraded by the "apt-get upgrade" operation. Please try the first and tell us the results. Thanks! Cheers, Patrick On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 11:26 AM, ML mail wrote: Hi, > >I was wondering why an "apt-get upgrade"on my Debian wheezy box does not want >to update the OpenJDK packages as you can see below: > > >shell$ apt-get upgrade > > >Reading package lists... Done >Building dependency tree >Reading state information... Done >The following packages have been kept back: >icedtea-6-jre-cacao icedtea-6-jre-jamvm openjdk-6-jre openjdk-6-jre-headless >openjdk-6-jre-lib >0 upgraded, 0 newly installed, 0 to remove and 5 not upgraded. > >Anyone has an idea why they are all kept back? Is something broken on my side >maybe? > >Regards >ML > > >-- >To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org >with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org >Archive: >https://lists.debian.org/947300723.1245321.1429608381379.javamail.ya...@mail.yahoo.com > > -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/1448263282.1248593.1429610360116.javamail.ya...@mail.yahoo.com
Re: apt-get upgrade: packages have been kept back
Hi, have you tried an "apt-get dist-upgrade"? Some packages won't be upgraded by the "apt-get upgrade" operation. Please try the first and tell us the results. Thanks! Cheers, Patrick On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 11:26 AM, ML mail wrote: > Hi, > > I was wondering why an "apt-get upgrade"on my Debian wheezy box does not > want to update the OpenJDK packages as you can see below: > > > shell$ apt-get upgrade > > > Reading package lists... Done > Building dependency tree > Reading state information... Done > The following packages have been kept back: > icedtea-6-jre-cacao icedtea-6-jre-jamvm openjdk-6-jre > openjdk-6-jre-headless openjdk-6-jre-lib > 0 upgraded, 0 newly installed, 0 to remove and 5 not upgraded. > > Anyone has an idea why they are all kept back? Is something broken on my > side maybe? > > Regards > ML > > > -- > To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org > with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact > listmas...@lists.debian.org > Archive: > https://lists.debian.org/947300723.1245321.1429608381379.javamail.ya...@mail.yahoo.com > >
