On 2016-12-01, David Wright <deb...@lionunicorn.co.uk> wrote:
> On Wed 30 Nov 2016 at 08:47:21 (-0500), Stefan Monnier wrote:
>> > apt-mark showmanual gives you the complement of apt-mark showauto.
>> > The second paragraph of apt-mark's description explains what's meant
>> > by "auto". So "manual" doesn't mean what you appear to assume it does,
>> > that you were involved in manually selecting it for installation. It
>> > just means "not auto".
>> To me "auto" means "not manually",
> Yes, auto and manual are anotnyms.
>> so I'm just as confused as Rodolfo
>> and I think for good reasons.
> I don't know whether Rodolfo is still confused after the explanation
> I gave. AFAICT once you realise that manual means "not marked as auto"
> rather than "I installed this by typing apt* <packagename>", then it's
> fairly obvious that "manual" is a bucket term that includes, for
> example, packages installed by the debian-installer because they're
> essential, with Priority: required.
I think in the OP's case having asked for the whole Gnome kit and
caboodle upon installation he's got lots of stuff he might not even be
aware of necessarily that doesn't fall into the auto category (or the
high priority required category either), but that he didn't expressly
install. I guess I'm just repeating what you already said though. I
suppose the confusion derives from the fact that the word manual
connotes "requiring human effort," and certain manual packages appear
on our systems effortlessly.
> I can't remember installing bash or grep, but they're certainly not
> auto, so they're going to be "unmarked auto", or "marked non-auto",
> or "marked manual". I think I'll stick to the last. What would
> you prefer?
>> There might be technical reasons behind
>> the way it currently works, but I think this qualifies as a bug (maybe
>> a UI bug, maybe a coding bug, maybe a doc bug).
> *What* qualifies as a bug...that you're confused?
“It is enough that the arrows fit exactly in the wounds that they have made.”