O.K. Thanxs for the explanation. I tried the script and it works fine *BUT* it also doesn't report any dep. issues; i.e. substituting --no-uninstall for --keep reports the dep. issues. (And the same list as before.) As such, it is more useful, at least as far as knowing that there are some dep. issues extent.
Thank you again. Bob On Thursday 07 August 2003 03:11 pm, Buchan Milne wrote: > On Thu, 7 Aug 2003, w9ya wrote: > > On Thursday 07 August 2003 10:04 am, Fran�ois Pons wrote: > > > You may try the following option too --keep which avoid updating in > > > order not to remove existing package (only upgrade are allowed, this > > > avoid using --no-uninstall). > > > > I am sorry, but I do not undersatand the English you are using here. I > > *do* want to update, and am not trying to "...avoid updating..." . > > --keep will only preven uninstallation of files that need to be > uninstalled to upgrade others, preventing you from losing all of KDE for > one libpackage-devel that didn't make an upload or mirror sync. It will > try and upgrade all other packages which can be upgraded. > > > > Another method is to use urpmi --auto-select directly as there is now > > > an integrated split mechanism to avoid such a loop you use, furthermore > > > the split is done in a way the package are installed in right order to > > > minimize transaction size (which is not the case when using an urpmq > > > --auto-select output). > > > > Could you supply an appropriate example of such a script please ? > > If you have a mildly recent urpmi, it should not be necessary, since: > # urpmi --auto-select --auto --keep > should work (BTW, I run this in cron) > > Regards, > Buchan
