Hi,
- If I see a new package installed by someone else,
* if nothing depends on it, mark it Unknown; probably manually installed
* otherwise, mark it Unknown; probably automatically installed
Consider
apt-get install foo
apt-get remove foo
This leaves libfoo1, which was pulled in by foo and
On Wed, Dec 15, 2004 at 10:20:09AM +0900, Miles Bader wrote:
The other problem with aptitude is touted as a design feature: it
tends to be all-or-nothing. Either you use it always or you don't
(automatic removal thingie). This becomes a problem when multiple
persons use
Op wo, 15-12-2004 te 05:57 -0600, schreef Marcelo E. Magallon:
On Wed, Dec 15, 2004 at 10:20:09AM +0900, Miles Bader wrote:
The other problem with aptitude is touted as a design feature: it
tends to be all-or-nothing. Either you use it always or you don't
(automatic removal
Package: aptitude
Severity: wishlist
Hi,
[aptitude not properly handling packages installed by other tools]
ACK. I very much prefer the way debfoster handles this: if there are
new, unknown packages on the system, it will ask, rather than assume,
whether a package is wanted or not. And will only
On Wednesday 15 December 2004 09:01 am, Simon Richter wrote:
aptitude could be taught to have auto-installed being Yes,No or
Unknown. Whenever a package that is in Unknown state could be removed
if it were only installed as a dependency, aptitude should list them in
the actions to be performed
On Wed, Dec 15, 2004 at 01:53:20PM -0500, Daniel Burrows wrote:
On Wednesday 15 December 2004 09:01 am, Simon Richter wrote:
aptitude could be taught to have auto-installed being Yes,No or
Unknown. Whenever a package that is in Unknown state could be removed
if it were only installed as a
On Wednesday 15 December 2004 03:37 pm, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
It seems like Unknown would just be a synonym for No, right?
Uh, yes. I think.
You may want to explain that a bit more.
Well, from the bug report, it looks like the proposal is to maintain the
current behavior, but to set a
On Wed, Dec 15, 2004 at 04:02:03PM -0500, Daniel Burrows wrote:
On Wednesday 15 December 2004 03:37 pm, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
? It seems like Unknown would just be a synonym for No, right?
Uh, yes. I think.
You may want to explain that a bit more.
Well, from the bug report, it
On Wednesday 15 December 2004 07:51 pm, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
You may also want to set a flag on packages that are assumed to be
automatically installed, but of which you have no information.
aptitude never should assume that a package is automatically installed,
unless it performs the
On Fri, Dec 10, 2004 at 11:52:05AM +0900, Miles Bader wrote:
Completely and utterly wrong in my case. I'm exactly the sort of
person that you apparently think should like dselect, but I think
aptitude is _far_ superior, for both experts and newbies. The
competition isn't even close.
Marcelo E. Magallon [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
The other problem with aptitude is touted as a design feature: it tends
to be all-or-nothing. Either you use it always or you don't (automatic
removal thingie). This becomes a problem when multiple persons use
different interfaces for adding
On Fri, Dec 10, 2004 at 10:21:07PM +0100, Bernd Eckenfels wrote:
aptitude has a nice usage enter means drill down, this is intuitive.
'q' means quit/leave level backward - this is intuitive
I have to say that 'q' doing something other than quitting the program
strikes me as being totally
On 10-Dec-04, 17:02 (CST), Florent Rougon [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Bernd Eckenfels [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
No, it is because the shortcuts are completely non-intuitive. I use
aptitude for the good intuitive keymapping, not for its menu.
I see. You find them utterly unintuitive, and
Steve Greenland writes,
Which, of course, isn't to say that it should be
removed. I was surprised by how many people still use
it; I hope some one will pick [dselect] up.
Dselect is sufficiently important to me that, as time
permits, I mean to pick it up.
Another competent person with more
Florent Rougon [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
If you don't like dselect and don't fall in one of the cases I have
mentioned, then we have a problem.
Ok, I'll be more explicit: I don't like dselect, and I don't fall into
any of your cases.
dselect is perhaps not as completely awful as some people
Florent Rougon [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I've always thought that people who say they hate dselect (or, worse,
that dselect is crap) fall into one of the following cases:
(a) allergic to text-mode interfaces
(b) type or click without thinking
(c) haven't used it for more than 5 years (I
On Sun, Dec 12, 2004 at 11:35:22AM +1100, Paul Hampson wrote:
apt-get and apt-cache are my friends, and I love them for letting me
specify what I want to do in a way that is intuitive to me. Altough I
wish I could tab-complete package names sometimes. ^_^
If you're running bash you can
Bernd Eckenfels [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Er, these are shortcuts. *shrug*
Uh, so there is a non-shortcut method of operating?
I awaited this comment, but didn't know which other word to use. No, I
don't claim there is a non-shortcut method. I would say that dselects'
control interface
Miles Bader [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Completely and utterly wrong in my case. I'm exactly the sort of person
that you apparently think should like dselect, but I think aptitude is
_far_ superior, for both experts and newbies. The competition isn't even
close.
Did I mention aptitude in my
On Fri, Dec 10, 2004 at 12:03:03PM +0100, Florent Rougon wrote:
[1] I still use both versions and happen to often hit space instead of
enter when I use sid's one, which doesn't have any bad
consequences (simply scrolls help). And the problem will disappear
automatically when I
On Fri, 10 Dec 2004 12:13:29 +0100, Florent Rougon [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm just trying to understand
people who bash dselect on the first occasion. If you don't like dselect
and don't fall in one of the cases I have mentioned, then we have a
problem. Simply preferring aptitude is *not* a
David Schmitt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, Dec 10, 2004 at 12:03:03PM +0100, Florent Rougon wrote:
[1] I still use both versions and happen to often hit space instead of
enter when I use sid's one, which doesn't have any bad
consequences (simply scrolls help). And the problem will
Blunt Jackson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Do I consider this a problem? Not particularly. It is my problem, as
much as anyone's. This is a sophisticated sysadmin tool, and I am only
an occasional sysadmin, by no means sophisticated.
So, I guess some people simply don't like the *type* of control
On Fri, Dec 10, 2004 at 10:03:01PM +0100, Florent Rougon wrote:
So, I guess some people simply don't like the *type* of control
interface dselect offers, cause they want to see menus and widgets all
around instead of having to learn that $keystroke will perform $action.
Their main grief
On Fri, Dec 10, 2004 at 12:03:03PM +0100, Florent Rougon wrote:
I understand that this may be unpleasant to some people
It is not a problem for me that dseclt has no menu, it is a problem that the
keys are totally unintuitive, and some screens are really bothering.
aptitude has a nice usage
On Thu, Dec 09, 2004 at 10:22:08PM -0500, Daniel Burrows wrote:
If you want to find alternatives for a virtual package, you can use 'd' and
'r' to navigate the dependency lists. It's not as convenient as dselect, but
it works.
Well actually you can enter the package you dont want to have
* Bernd Eckenfels [EMAIL PROTECTED] [041210 22:18]:
Their main grief towards dselect is therefore formulated as awkward,
non-intuitive user interface as you wrote above.
No, it is because the shortcuts are completely non-intuitive. I use
aptitude for the good intuitive keymapping, not for
Bernd Eckenfels [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
No, it is because the shortcuts are completely non-intuitive. I use
aptitude for the good intuitive keymapping, not for its menu.
I see. You find them utterly unintuitive, and are not alone. I don't
claim they are really intuitive (for what it
On Friday 10 December 2004 04:23 pm, Bernd Eckenfels wrote:
On Thu, Dec 09, 2004 at 10:22:08PM -0500, Daniel Burrows wrote:
If you want to find alternatives for a virtual package, you can use 'd'
and 'r' to navigate the dependency lists. It's not as convenient as
dselect, but it works.
On Wed, Dec 08, 2004 at 08:30:50PM -0800, Blunt Jackson wrote:
Having
enter exit the
selection process (rather than simply selecting the entry) is
perennially surprising,
And the need to use upper-Q in conflict resolution to keep the selections
one has made manually is also pretty confusing.
Bernd Eckenfels [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, Dec 08, 2004 at 08:30:50PM -0800, Blunt Jackson wrote:
Having
enter exit the
selection process (rather than simply selecting the entry) is
perennially surprising,
And the need to use upper-Q in conflict resolution to keep the selections
one
On Thu, Dec 09, 2004 at 11:08:53PM +0100, Florent Rougon wrote:
I've always thought that people who say they hate dselect (or, worse,
that dselect is crap) fall into one of the following cases:
(a) allergic to text-mode interfaces
(b) type or click without thinking
(c) haven't used it
Miles Bader [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The current aptitude, by contrast, seems both powerful and elegant: it
rarely gets in my way, deals well with problem situations, and offers
powerful features should I want them (aptitude of years past could also
be kinda cranky though).
The last time I
On Thu, Dec 09, 2004 at 11:08:53PM +0100, Florent Rougon wrote:
And the need to use upper-Q in conflict resolution to keep the selections
one has made manually is also pretty confusing.
Er, these are shortcuts. *shrug*
Uh, so there is a non-shortcut method of operating?
management (I
On Thu, Dec 09, 2004 at 10:27:50PM +, Roger Lynn wrote:
The last time I used aptitude (about six months ago, from Testing), I
found it difficult to specify how I wanted dependencies
You just use g and resolve the dependencies? (Kind of same as in dselect)
Greetings
Bernd
--
(OO)
Florent Rougon [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I've always thought that people who say they hate dselect (or, worse,
that dselect is crap) fall into one of the following cases:
(a) allergic to text-mode interfaces
(b) type or click without thinking
(c) haven't used it for more than 5 years (I
On Thursday 09 December 2004 06:35 pm, Bernd Eckenfels wrote:
On Thu, Dec 09, 2004 at 10:27:50PM +, Roger Lynn wrote:
The last time I used aptitude (about six months ago, from Testing), I
found it difficult to specify how I wanted dependencies
You just use g and resolve the
Miles Bader dijo [Fri, Dec 10, 2004 at 11:52:05AM +0900]:
Completely and utterly wrong in my case. I'm exactly the sort of person
that you apparently think should like dselect, but I think aptitude is
_far_ superior, for both experts and newbies. The competition isn't even
close.
AOLME
Gergely Korodi [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
From time to time I give a try to aptitude and synaptic, but always recoil
in horror. I don't know what the fuss is about aptitude, IMHO it's way
more complicated to use than dselect, and less clear as well.
Amazing
I used dselect a lot back in
On Thu, Dec 09, 2004 at 11:11:31AM +0900, Miles Bader wrote:
I used dselect a lot back in the day (I don't know, like up until 2000
or so?). It had a clunky but useable interface (though I fully
understand how newbies could get frustrated), and generally worked all
right until there was a
On Wed, Dec 08, 2004 at 10:23:16PM -0500, Mason Loring Bliss wrote:
On Thu, Dec 09, 2004 at 11:11:31AM +0900, Miles Bader wrote:
I used dselect a lot back in the day (I don't know, like up until 2000
or so?). It had a clunky but useable interface (though I fully
understand how newbies
On Wed, 8 Dec 2004 19:32:35 -0800, Brian Nelson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, Dec 08, 2004 at 10:23:16PM -0500, Mason Loring Bliss wrote:
Maybe I'm still waiting for my first real problem to show up, but I
generally find dselect to be a real pleasure to use.
Could you present an
42 matches
Mail list logo
