On Thu, 14 Jan 2016 22:44:07 -0600 David Wright <deb...@lionunicorn.co.uk> wrote:
>On Thu 14 Jan 2016 at 20:33:45 (-0700), Charlie Kravetz wrote: >> On Thu, 14 Jan 2016 21:37:49 -0500 Gene Heskett <ghesk...@shentel.net> >> wrote: >> >On Thursday 14 January 2016 21:04:32 Charlie Kravetz wrote: >> >> On Fri, 15 Jan 2016 00:27:19 +0000 Lisi Reisz <lisi.re...@gmail.com> >> >> wrote: >> >> >On Thursday 14 January 2016 23:49:03 Gene Heskett wrote: >> >> >> On Thursday 14 January 2016 17:39:59 Johann Klammer wrote: >> >> >> > On 01/14/2016 10:50 PM, Gene Heskett wrote: >> >> >> > > On Thursday 14 January 2016 16:18:08 Johann Klammer wrote: >> >> >> > >> Synaptic runs on your box? >> >> >> > >> Years ago, when I tried it, it would always crash right on >> >> >> > >> startup.... use aptitude. It seems a lot more stable... >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > > Back on list where it belongs. >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > > I just ran it, and its obvious it doesn't reference the same >> >> >> > > database of installed files that apt and synaptic use. It just >> >> >> > > now wanted >> >> >> > >> >> >> > AFAIK, It does use the same database. Your system seems hosed... >> >> >> > Are you running it on the box that the OS is installed on, or on >> >> >> > some (boot... ,whatever) client? >> >> >> >> >> >> Directly on the os and box connected to this keyboard, no vpn's or >> >> >> anything else involved. >> >> >> >> >> >> > > to "upgrade" or sidegrade, 292 packages. Refreshing the list >> >> >> > > didn't help but it reminded me of the 4 color screens we had on >> >> >> > > the amiga's back in the amigados-1.3 days. Positively an >> >> >> > > assault on the eyeballs. >> >> >> > >> >> >> > press u to update. >> >> >> >> >> >> I did, didn't affect its faulty judgement a bit. It still wanted to >> >> >> update nearly 300 packages. >> >> >> >> >> >> > > But when an uptodate system is said to have 292 old or >> >> >> > > defective packages on it, I'm not sure I want it mucking around >> >> >> > > in MY used car lot. >> >> >> > >> >> >> > what kind of defective? broken? that means the dependencies are >> >> >> > not met... Press e to start the interactive resolver. >> >> >> > a and r to accept or reject. >> >> >> >> >> >> I'd have no clue what its doing in the background when I do that. >> >> >> FWIW, I had it hose the system on my laptop about 4 years ago with >> >> >> exactly this sort of a starting point. I'll pass as its 99.99% >> >> >> working right now. >> >> >> >> >> >> > > For what its worth, as root, an apt-get update, followed by an >> >> >> > > apt-get upgrade reports 0 package to upgrade. >> >> >> >> The answer may be in the above sentence. What does apt-get update, >> >> followed by apt-get dist-upgrade show? upgrade on its own does not >> >> upgrade all packages. It skips kernel and some other stuff. Perhaps >> >> that accounts for the differences? >> > >> >Will that not update me to Jessie? I'd rather not take that step until a >> >fresh spin is available from linuxcnc.org, not too long after 16.04 LTS >> >is out. >> >> It will only upgrade if you add or change the /etc/apt/sources.list to >> include jessie or stable. As long as the sources.list is referring to >> wheezy only, it will simply upgrade all the packages to the highest >> level in wheezy. Without it, a bunch of packages will not upgrade, ever. >> >> Let's see if anyone else can shed more light on this. I have always >> used dist-upgrade, because I always wanted all the packages up-to-date. >> If it is never used, running debian, the kernel has never upgraded and >> could cause another batch of monkeys running really bad. > >Is it worth quoting what Gene has already written in >https://lists.debian.org/debian-user/2016/01/msg00625.html > >"... all 4 machines were installed from >the same hybride-iso image you can get from linuxcnc.org. Its based on >debian wheezy, but with a pinned kernel on the other 3 machines, the >kernels haveing been patched with the RTAI kit for realtime usage. All >4 machines are running a 3.4-9-rtai-686-pae kernel, which unfortunately >for this machine, pae doesn't work after the rtai patch, but this is the >only machine with sufficient (8Gb) memory to make use of the pae. > >There is a 3.16-something or other kernel that it wants me to update to, >and which is installed, but its a 64 bit kernel and linuxcnc will not run >on a 64 bit kernel for realtime stuff. So I always reboot to the one I >know works..." > >> >> >> > > From that it would appear aptitude is confused at best, broken >> >> >> > > at worst. >> >> >> >> >> >> No comment? Seems like the above report does warrant some sort of >> >> >> a reply. >> >> > >> >> >Gene, it isn't worthy of a response, so Johann wisely ignored it. >> >> > Johann - Gene has wheezy-backports fully enabled in his >> >> > sources.list, with, so far as I can tell, the same pinning as the >> >> > other sources. Synaptic used it to upgrade over 300 packages. It >> >> > is probably some kind of kludge, resulting from this,that Aptitude >> >> > is trying to sort out. >> >> > >> >> >Gene enjoys breaking his system and then seeing if he can make it run >> >> >again. > >Bear in mind the system was broken from day one---by the "broken installer" ;) > >> >> > Genuinely. I believe. If it actually ran smoothly he would >> >> > probably be bored, and immediately deliberately break it again. He >> >> > wants to write all his own scripts, and is frustrated that he is not >> >> > as good at it as when he was younger (I can empathise there!!), but >> >> > uses a GUI package manager which isn't as good at sorting out >> >> > problems, and shies away from the CLI. :-/ >> >> > >> >> >But, as I say, Aptitude is probably unhappy with a system fully >> >> > upgraded to Backports. >> >> > >> >> >> > > All of these tools are, AFAIK, supposed to be using the same >> >> >> > > sources.list, and the same installed list. update-manager does >> >> >> > > but Obviously aptitude is not. >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > > I believe I'll stick to using synaptic. >> >> >> >> >> >> +10 >> >> > >> >> >Glad you still wholeheartedly agree with yourself, Gene. ;-) >> >> > >> >> >Lisi >> > >> >Cheers, Gene Heskett >> >> Charlie Kravetz > >Cheers, >David. > So, Gene's machines are always going to behind? He should never run apt-get dist-upgrade because it will upgrade that kernel, and he doesn't want that? It's a situation where running dist-upgrade or aptitude will screw him, right? -- Charlie Kravetz Linux Registered User Number 425914 [http://linuxcounter.net/user/425914.html] Never let anyone steal your DREAM. [http://keepingdreams.com]