Theo Schmidt wrote:
> Am Freitag, 8. Juli 2005 05.45 schrieb Bob Proulx:
> ...
>> Just the same, I can't see any documentation that says mixing apt-get
>> and aptitude is bad...
>
> Any thoughts on using concurrently apt-get, synaptic, and kpackage? I had
> always thought that these use the same
On Friday 08 July 2005 09:11, Theo Schmidt wrote:
> Am Freitag, 8. Juli 2005 05.45 schrieb Bob Proulx:
> ...
>
> > Just the same, I can't see any documentation that says
> > mixing apt-get and aptitude is bad...
>
> Any thoughts on using concurrently apt-get, synaptic, and
> kpackage? I had always
On Friday 08 July 2005 09:11, Theo Schmidt wrote:
> Am Freitag, 8. Juli 2005 05.45 schrieb Bob Proulx:
> ...
>
> > Just the same, I can't see any documentation that says
> > mixing apt-get and aptitude is bad...
>
> Any thoughts on using concurrently apt-get, synaptic, and
> kpackage? I had always
Am Freitag, 8. Juli 2005 05.45 schrieb Bob Proulx:
...
> Just the same, I can't see any documentation that says mixing apt-get
> and aptitude is bad...
Any thoughts on using concurrently apt-get, synaptic, and kpackage? I had
always thought that these use the same database so that each would be a
Hendrik Sattler wrote:
> Additionally, aptitude has some problems with pinning.
Really? It took me some work to get it right, but it doesn't seem any worse
than pinning under apt-get - which _still_ has problems.
>
> A combination of apt-get and aptitude usage works the best, I'd say.
I haven'
Am Freitag, 8. Juli 2005 05:45 schrieb Bob Proulx:
> Prior to Sarge aptitude was not the recommended package management
> tool. The common program was apt-get or dselect. But following the
> recommendations in the release notes one will convert to using
> aptitude, at least for the upgrade from W
Alejandro Exojo wrote:
> El Jueves, 7 de Julio de 2005 17:37, Bob Proulx escribió:
> > What are different ways to use aptitude which would be bad? What is
> > an incorrect way to use aptitude? I can't really think of any. So
> > this statement leaves me not knowing what is being discussed. To b
El Jueves, 7 de Julio de 2005 17:37, Bob Proulx escribió:
> Alejandro Exojo wrote:
> > 1. aptitude
>
> Unfortunately that brings up an interactive GUI. I have far too many
> machines to interactively babysit each and every one of them
> uniquely. It is just not practical.
Yes, I understand that
Bob Proulx wrote:
> What are different ways to use aptitude which would be bad? What is
> an incorrect way to use aptitude? I can't really think of any. So
> this statement leaves me not knowing what is being discussed. To be
> clear I am talking about these commands. Are any of these incorre
On Thu, Jul 07, 2005 at 09:37:17AM -0600, Bob Proulx wrote:
> Alejandro Exojo wrote:
> > El Miércoles, 6 de Julio de 2005 02:40, Bob Proulx escribió:
> > > What answer do you choose? What are your follow-up actions? Please
> > > be specific.
> >
> > 1. aptitude
>
> Unfortunately that brings up
Alejandro Exojo wrote:
> El Miércoles, 6 de Julio de 2005 02:40, Bob Proulx escribió:
> > What answer do you choose? What are your follow-up actions? Please
> > be specific.
>
> 1. aptitude
Unfortunately that brings up an interactive GUI. I have far too many
machines to interactively babysit e
Jarkko Suontausta wrote:
> My point below was aimed at upgrading KDE _without_ logging out
> afterwards. It would be really nice to continue working even when KDE
> has been upgraded in the background, especially with many sessions
> open simultaneously. Any suggestions on avoiding the need to logo
On Wednesday 06 July 2005 08:54 am, Derek Broughton wrote:
> I've concluded that apt-get (much as I've loved it for years) is obsolete.
> Aptitude from the command line is better - yet command compatible. It's
> definitely going to screw things up, though, if you're using both.
Joy. OK, sell me
[Sorry to reply to my original posting, but I really thought that this
mail had not reached this mailing list - that's why I haven't watching
this thread. For some reason kmail still doesn't show my original mail
at all, although it exists in my Gmail inbox...]
My point below was aimed at upgradin
Alejandro Exojo wrote:
> El Miércoles, 6 de Julio de 2005 02:40, Bob Proulx escribió:
>> aptitude dist-upgrade
>> The following NEW packages will be installed:
>> ...new dependencies...
>> The following packages will be REMOVED:
>> ...most kde packages...
>> The following packages will be upgraded
El Miércoles, 6 de Julio de 2005 02:40, Bob Proulx escribió:
> aptitude dist-upgrade
> The following NEW packages will be installed:
> ...new dependencies...
> The following packages will be REMOVED:
> ...most kde packages...
> The following packages will be upgraded:
> ...useful pack
Brian Kimball wrote:
> Bob Proulx wrote:
> > in my work lab engineering environment with a lot of random users
> > installing a lot of random kde components
>
> In your lab, "a lot of random users" have root? Nice.
Yes. Don't you?
A friend of mine when interviewing for jobs used to ask the
inte
Brian Kimball wrote:
> Bob Proulx wrote:
> > I have a rather agressive method.
> > ...
> > Then upgrade. Then reinstall KDE. Yes it is harsh.
>
> That's not just harsh, that's plain gross and wildly unnecessary. This
> isn't rpm on Red Hat 4.2.
When it comes to KDE upgrades if it walks like a
Bob Proulx wrote:
> I have a rather agressive method.
> KDEVERSION=$(dpkg --status kdelibs4 | awk '/^Version:/{print$2}')
> grep-available -n -s Package $KDEVERSION > /tmp/kde-pkg.list
> apt-get remove --purge $(
> Then upgrade. Then reinstall KDE. Yes it is harsh.
That's not just hars
Larry Garfield wrote:
> Am I the only one who upgrades KDE without problems? In the 2+ years I've
> been using Debian, I've taken KDE from 2.2.2 to 3.4.1, including every point
> release along the way, with only one hiccup; And that was a random 3rd party
> repository for KDE 3.0 under Woody th
Theo Schmidt wrote:
> Am Sonntag, 3. Juli 2005 02.04 schrieb Bob Proulx:
> > I have a rather agressive method.
> ...
> > I then remove that list. WARNING! Don't do this unless you know what
> > you are doing.
> ...
>
> What is the preferred methode for those of us who don't really know
> what th
Am I the only one who upgrades KDE without problems? In the 2+ years I've
been using Debian, I've taken KDE from 2.2.2 to 3.4.1, including every point
release along the way, with only one hiccup; And that was a random 3rd party
repository for KDE 3.0 under Woody that jammed on the KDEPIM packag
Am Sonntag, 3. Juli 2005 02.04 schrieb Bob Proulx:
> Jarkko Suontausta wrote:
> > Upgrading KDE when an older version is already running often causes a lot
> > of trouble
>
> I have a rather agressive method.
...
> I then remove that list. WARNING! Don't do this unless you know what
> you are
Jarkko Suontausta wrote:
> Upgrading KDE when an older version is already running often causes a lot of
> trouble. This is mostly an upstream issue AFAIK, but it might be possible to
> add some preventive/corrective measures in the Debian packages. Does anyone
> have any ideas?
I have a rather
Hi!
Upgrading KDE when an older version is already running often causes a lot of
trouble. This is mostly an upstream issue AFAIK, but it might be possible to
add some preventive/corrective measures in the Debian packages. Does anyone
have any ideas?
Cheers,
--
Jarkko
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, ema
25 matches
Mail list logo
