Re: aptitude and held packages

2010-04-30 Thread Daniel Burrows
On Tue, Apr 27, 2010 at 01:14:44PM +0300, Andrei Popescu was heard to say: > On Mon,26.Apr.10, 10:29:06, Rick Pasotto wrote: > > I just upgraded apt and aptitude to the latest testing version. Although > > 'aptitude -s safe-upgrade' tells me that '172 not upgraded' it no longer > > lists them. Is

Re: aptitude and held packages

2010-04-29 Thread Andrei Popescu
On Mon,26.Apr.10, 10:29:06, Rick Pasotto wrote: > I just upgraded apt and aptitude to the latest testing version. Although > 'aptitude -s safe-upgrade' tells me that '172 not upgraded' it no longer > lists them. Is this a bug or an intentional change? It probably depends on whether you consider th

Re: aptitude and held packages

2010-04-27 Thread Daniel Burrows
On Mon, Apr 26, 2010 at 10:29:06AM -0400, Rick Pasotto was heard to say: > I just upgraded apt and aptitude to the latest testing version. Although > 'aptitude -s safe-upgrade' tells me that '172 not upgraded' it no longer > lists them. Is this a bug or an intentional change? That's ... a good

Re: aptitude and held packages

2010-04-27 Thread Anand Sivaram
Try "aptitude -s full-upgrade" to see the remaining packages to be upgraded. This is because safe-upgrade does not remove any installed package. Try "man aptitude" to see the difference between these two options. On Mon, Apr 26, 2010 at 19:59, Rick Pasotto wrote: > I just upgraded apt and aptitu

aptitude and held packages

2010-04-26 Thread Rick Pasotto
I just upgraded apt and aptitude to the latest testing version. Although 'aptitude -s safe-upgrade' tells me that '172 not upgraded' it no longer lists them. Is this a bug or an intentional change? -- "Pay less attention to what men say. Just watch what they do." -- Dale Carnegie Rick