> So, which is it: You install random things you don't care about because their 
> name appeared in the kept-back list or you explicitly install that package 
> from the kept-back list because you care very deeply about it?

I and many others (this issue is not about me) install them like that because 
their name appeared in the kept-back list. So it's the former and I never said 
it wouldn't be that.

> APT isn't keeping back a package because its bored. It has reasons ...

Thanks for the explanations. One only sees which packages it would install or 
remove when one tries to install it, like so for sysv-rc-conf that wants to 
remove countless core packages: 
https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1042467 (still no reply 
there) / https://unix.stackexchange.com/q/748950/233262 (how to see why) This 
issue however is not what happens when one checks what it would do when 
installing a kept-back package or about what could go wrong with installing it, 
it's about how the package is marked when one already decided and went ahead 
with installing it.

> that isn't how apt sees it. You might remember that in a previous request you 
> made apt might have said that about a package, but apt has no such memory

Well then part of this would be to make it run a check if any of the packages 
to be installed is currently kept-back. I never said it would have to keep 
prior apt commands in mind, it just knows (can check) which packages are 
kept-back. In the usual scenario the notice about a kept-package displays 
during an apt-get upgrade/update command.

> based on your explicit manual install request

This issue is not about installs that are explicitly manual and it shouldn't be 
merged with other issues that are about something else.

Reply via email to