Re: Jessie --> Stretch upgrade, apt question

[David Wright]

On Thu 29 Jun 2017 at 07:31:35 (+), Curt wrote:
> On 2017-06-28, David Wright  wrote:
> >
> >> 'apt-get install ' will tell you why a package is being held
> >> back (or, as discussed in another thread, will ask your permission to
> >> install an extra package--or packages--in order to meet its dependencies).
> >
> > It's less risky to add the -s switch and just be a user, thus:
> 
> I wasn't aware of that.
> 
> > $ apt-get -s install 
> 
> However:
> 
> curty@einstein:~$ apt-get -s install bzflag
> NOTE: This is only a simulation!
>   apt-get needs root privileges for real execution.
>   Keep also in mind that locking is deactivated,
>   so don't depend on the relevance to the real current
>   situation!
> 
> I suppose 'locking is deactivated, so don't depend on the relevance to the
> real current situation!" might mean on a multi-user system on which the
> administrator is fiddling with a package manager concurrently, the
> output of your command might or might not reflect reality.

Yes, that's the meaning of the disclaimer, but I've always assumed
that almost everyone here is an administrator for their system(s).
However, some are very timorous when it comes to running the apt*
package managers, particularly as root.

>  [Re: apt-get upgrade problem] >>> What?
> 
> > Attached…
> 
> So you were facetiously applying my query to the Woolf signature quote
> (which I don't see and didn't think anybody was seeing and assumed was
> being snipped by the list master along with all the other conformingly
> formatted signatures).

I can't see the point of using a signature that can't be seen.
My mutt client displays them (coloured when conforming), both
when composing messages (which allows for tweaking) and when
reading them. I also see them in the list archives.

Cheers,
David.

Re: Jessie --> Stretch upgrade, apt question

[Curt]

On 2017-06-28, David Wright  wrote:
>
>> 'apt-get install ' will tell you why a package is being held
>> back (or, as discussed in another thread, will ask your permission to
>> install an extra package--or packages--in order to meet its dependencies).
>
> It's less risky to add the -s switch and just be a user, thus:

I wasn't aware of that.

> $ apt-get -s install 

However:

curty@einstein:~$ apt-get -s install bzflag
NOTE: This is only a simulation!
  apt-get needs root privileges for real execution.
  Keep also in mind that locking is deactivated,
  so don't depend on the relevance to the real current
  situation!

I suppose 'locking is deactivated, so don't depend on the relevance to the
real current situation!" might mean on a multi-user system on which the
administrator is fiddling with a package manager concurrently, the
output of your command might or might not reflect reality.

 [Re: apt-get upgrade problem] >>> What?

> Attached…

So you were facetiously applying my query to the Woolf signature quote
(which I don't see and didn't think anybody was seeing and assumed was
being snipped by the list master along with all the other conformingly
formatted signatures).

> Cheers,
> David.
>

-- 
“Yeah yeah.” --Sidney Morgenbesser's retort to a speaker who said that although
there are many cases in which two negatives make a positive, he knew of no case
in which two positives made a negative.

Re: Jessie --> Stretch upgrade, apt question

[David Wright]

On Sun 25 Jun 2017 at 11:36:37 (+), Curt wrote:
> On 2017-06-25, Mark Fletcher  wrote:
> >
> > My question is that since the upgrade chromium is held back from 
> > upgrading, and in this new world I don't know how to find out why. In 
> > aptitude I would have done aptitude why-not chromium and it would most 
> > likely have told me something useful about its dependencies. How can I 
> > get apt to do similar? Or what tool should I use?
> >
> 
> 'apt-get install ' will tell you why a package is being held
> back (or, as discussed in another thread, will ask your permission to
> install an extra package--or packages--in order to meet its dependencies).

It's less risky to add the -s switch and just be a user, thus:

$ apt-get -s install 

>>> [Re: apt-get upgrade problem] >>> What?

Attached…

Cheers,
David.

Re: Jessie --> Stretch upgrade, apt question

[Brian]

On Wed 28 Jun 2017 at 22:19:18 +0900, Mark Fletcher wrote:

> On Sun, Jun 25, 2017 at 11:18:46AM +0200, Dejan Jocic wrote:
> > 
> > In short, use aptitude for why and why-not. Closest thing apt-get and
> > friends have would be apt-cache --important depends/rdepends. But,
> > aptitude is much better suited for that task. And for all other tasks
> > that involve advanced searching, as far as I could tell. As for apt
> > itself, would not know exactly, I refuse to use tool with man page that
> > treats me like an idiot, while not giving me anything new and important
> > compared to apt-get and friends. But guess would be that it is apt
> > --important depends/rdepends. And probably not more helpful than
> > apt-cache variant.
> > 
> 
> Hmmm. So we end up using apt-get for major version upgrades (according 
> to the recommendations of the release notes), apt most of the time 
> (according to the recommendation of all the tools, including apt-get, 
> when the slightest thing goes wrong), and aptitude when neither apt-get 
> or apt have a good way to do something? Seems like this area of Debian 
> could use a cleanup.
> 
> Thanks for the reply though.

Dejan Jocic makes a fair point contasting the search aspects of aptitude
and apt-cache and questions whether apt provides anything significantly
more than apt-get.

I think you are reading too much into his reply. For example, I suspect
aptitude would handle a major version upgrade just as well as apt-get.
No doubt it has been done successfully; day-to-day upgrades too. I do
not know where apt fits into this picture; it provides fluffiness,
perhaps.

What would a cleanup involve?

Re: Jessie --> Stretch upgrade, apt question

[Mark Fletcher]

On Sun, Jun 25, 2017 at 11:36:37AM +, Curt wrote:
> On 2017-06-25, Mark Fletcher  wrote:
> >
> > My question is that since the upgrade chromium is held back from 
> > upgrading, and in this new world I don't know how to find out why. In 
> > aptitude I would have done aptitude why-not chromium and it would most 
> > likely have told me something useful about its dependencies. How can I 
> > get apt to do similar? Or what tool should I use?
> >
> 
> 'apt-get install ' will tell you why a package is being held
> back (or, as discussed in another thread, will ask your permission to
> install an extra package--or packages--in order to meet its dependencies).
> 

It did indeed -- turns out libgnutls depended on libtrm1 (sp?) but the 
version required "is not going to be installed".

And the reason for THAT turned out to be that a while back, while still 
on Jessie I experimented with the deb-multimedia repository and that 
repository uses incompatible version numbers for (at least) some 
packages, which resulted in the version from the jessie deb-multimedia 
repository not being upgraded to the new stretch version, causing 
version incompatibilities.

I was musing on how to solve that when I, in an entirely separate thread 
of thought, decided to install the zoneminder software for monitoring 
security cameras. The version of it packaged for stretch is offered in 
the... deb-multimedia repository. So I have ended up adding it back to 
my system, doing which resolved the issue anyway.

Mark

Re: Jessie --> Stretch upgrade, apt question

[Mark Fletcher]

On Sun, Jun 25, 2017 at 11:18:46AM +0200, Dejan Jocic wrote:
> On 25-06-17, Mark Fletcher wrote:
> > Hello the list!
> > 
> > I have upgraded this weekend from Jessie to Stretch. All went, overall, 
> > reasonably smoothly -- the documentation around releases is getting 
> > better and better. I plan to write a full report of the upgrade and 
> > share it here shortly. In the meantime I have one question.
> > 
> > It seems like aptitude is falling out of favour in stretch, and apt as a 
> > command line tool as opposed to the name for the general entire package 
> > management system is being recommended these days. I've never been a 
> > huge fan of apt-get (although to be fair that means little more than I 
> > settled on aptitude [command-line version not ncurses version] and 
> > learned its quirks a long time ago) and so I am, somewhat reluctantly, 
> > making the switch to apt from aptitude. apt has a couple of features I 
> > really like, but I do wish apt show made it easier to tell if a package 
> > is installed -- you have to read a lot further down the info to find 
> > out.
> > 
> > My question is that since the upgrade chromium is held back from 
> > upgrading, and in this new world I don't know how to find out why. In 
> > aptitude I would have done aptitude why-not chromium and it would most 
> > likely have told me something useful about its dependencies. How can I 
> > get apt to do similar? Or what tool should I use?
> > 
> > I'm aware that apt-cache depends chromium will tell me what it depends 
> > on, but that doesn't tell me what is stopping it from being upgraded.
> > 
> > sudo apt upgrade and sudo apt full-upgrade both just tell me chromium 
> > has been kept back, but not why.
> > 
> > sudo apt --fix-broken install finds nothing to do.
> > 
> > Suggestions would be much appreciated.
> > 
> > Mark
> > 
> 
> In short, use aptitude for why and why-not. Closest thing apt-get and
> friends have would be apt-cache --important depends/rdepends. But,
> aptitude is much better suited for that task. And for all other tasks
> that involve advanced searching, as far as I could tell. As for apt
> itself, would not know exactly, I refuse to use tool with man page that
> treats me like an idiot, while not giving me anything new and important
> compared to apt-get and friends. But guess would be that it is apt
> --important depends/rdepends. And probably not more helpful than
> apt-cache variant.
> 

Hmmm. So we end up using apt-get for major version upgrades (according 
to the recommendations of the release notes), apt most of the time 
(according to the recommendation of all the tools, including apt-get, 
when the slightest thing goes wrong), and aptitude when neither apt-get 
or apt have a good way to do something? Seems like this area of Debian 
could use a cleanup.

Thanks for the reply though.

Mark

Re: Jessie --> Stretch upgrade, apt question

[Mark Fletcher]

On Sun, Jun 25, 2017 at 12:29:27PM -0700, Cousin Stanley wrote:
> Mark Fletcher wrote:
> 
> > 
> > I do wish apt show made it easier to tell 
> > if a package is installed 
> > 
> 
>   $ apt policy some-pkg-name
> 
> which evolved from
> 
>   $ apt-cache policy pkg-name
> 
> 
>   will display installation status
>   of some-pkg-name
> 
Thanks all for the replies. Thanks to your help I have made progress and 
found what dependency issue is causing the problem. Unfortunately I am 
running late for work now so will reply later with more detail on which 
solution helped me with what, for the record.

Thanks again

Mark

Re: Jessie --> Stretch upgrade, apt question

[Cousin Stanley]

Mark Fletcher wrote:

> 
> I do wish apt show made it easier to tell 
> if a package is installed 
> 

  $ apt policy some-pkg-name

which evolved from

  $ apt-cache policy pkg-name


  will display installation status
  of some-pkg-name



-- 
Stanley C. Kitching
Human Being
Phoenix, Arizona

Re: Jessie --> Stretch upgrade, apt question

[Curt]

On 2017-06-25, Mark Fletcher  wrote:
>
> My question is that since the upgrade chromium is held back from 
> upgrading, and in this new world I don't know how to find out why. In 
> aptitude I would have done aptitude why-not chromium and it would most 
> likely have told me something useful about its dependencies. How can I 
> get apt to do similar? Or what tool should I use?
>

'apt-get install ' will tell you why a package is being held
back (or, as discussed in another thread, will ask your permission to
install an extra package--or packages--in order to meet its dependencies).

-- 
"It might be a vision--of a shell, of a wheelbarrow, of a fairy kingdom on the
far side of the hedge; or it might be the glory of speed; no one knew." --Mrs.
Ramsay, speculating on why her little daughter might be dashing about, in "To
the Lighthouse," by Virginia Woolf.

Re: Jessie --> Stretch upgrade, apt question

[Dejan Jocic]

On 25-06-17, Mark Fletcher wrote:
> Hello the list!
> 
> I have upgraded this weekend from Jessie to Stretch. All went, overall, 
> reasonably smoothly -- the documentation around releases is getting 
> better and better. I plan to write a full report of the upgrade and 
> share it here shortly. In the meantime I have one question.
> 
> It seems like aptitude is falling out of favour in stretch, and apt as a 
> command line tool as opposed to the name for the general entire package 
> management system is being recommended these days. I've never been a 
> huge fan of apt-get (although to be fair that means little more than I 
> settled on aptitude [command-line version not ncurses version] and 
> learned its quirks a long time ago) and so I am, somewhat reluctantly, 
> making the switch to apt from aptitude. apt has a couple of features I 
> really like, but I do wish apt show made it easier to tell if a package 
> is installed -- you have to read a lot further down the info to find 
> out.
> 
> My question is that since the upgrade chromium is held back from 
> upgrading, and in this new world I don't know how to find out why. In 
> aptitude I would have done aptitude why-not chromium and it would most 
> likely have told me something useful about its dependencies. How can I 
> get apt to do similar? Or what tool should I use?
> 
> I'm aware that apt-cache depends chromium will tell me what it depends 
> on, but that doesn't tell me what is stopping it from being upgraded.
> 
> sudo apt upgrade and sudo apt full-upgrade both just tell me chromium 
> has been kept back, but not why.
> 
> sudo apt --fix-broken install finds nothing to do.
> 
> Suggestions would be much appreciated.
> 
> Mark
> 

In short, use aptitude for why and why-not. Closest thing apt-get and
friends have would be apt-cache --important depends/rdepends. But,
aptitude is much better suited for that task. And for all other tasks
that involve advanced searching, as far as I could tell. As for apt
itself, would not know exactly, I refuse to use tool with man page that
treats me like an idiot, while not giving me anything new and important
compared to apt-get and friends. But guess would be that it is apt
--important depends/rdepends. And probably not more helpful than
apt-cache variant.

Jessie --> Stretch upgrade, apt question

[Mark Fletcher]

Hello the list!

I have upgraded this weekend from Jessie to Stretch. All went, overall, 
reasonably smoothly -- the documentation around releases is getting 
better and better. I plan to write a full report of the upgrade and 
share it here shortly. In the meantime I have one question.

It seems like aptitude is falling out of favour in stretch, and apt as a 
command line tool as opposed to the name for the general entire package 
management system is being recommended these days. I've never been a 
huge fan of apt-get (although to be fair that means little more than I 
settled on aptitude [command-line version not ncurses version] and 
learned its quirks a long time ago) and so I am, somewhat reluctantly, 
making the switch to apt from aptitude. apt has a couple of features I 
really like, but I do wish apt show made it easier to tell if a package 
is installed -- you have to read a lot further down the info to find 
out.

My question is that since the upgrade chromium is held back from 
upgrading, and in this new world I don't know how to find out why. In 
aptitude I would have done aptitude why-not chromium and it would most 
likely have told me something useful about its dependencies. How can I 
get apt to do similar? Or what tool should I use?

I'm aware that apt-cache depends chromium will tell me what it depends 
on, but that doesn't tell me what is stopping it from being upgraded.

sudo apt upgrade and sudo apt full-upgrade both just tell me chromium 
has been kept back, but not why.

sudo apt --fix-broken install finds nothing to do.

Suggestions would be much appreciated.

Mark

Re: Apt Question

[Michael Milliman]

On 05/23/2017 08:47 AM, to...@tuxteam.de wrote:
> On Tue, May 23, 2017 at 09:23:46AM -0400, Fungi4All wrote:
>>  Original Message 
>> Subject: Re: Apt Question
>> UTC Time: May 23, 2017 11:54 AM
>> From: wool...@eeg.ccf.org
> 
>>> If he
>>> is already running a sid linux kernel and some other core packages by
>>> switching to jessie he will be stuck with those packages almost 
>>> indefinitely,
> 
>> He's not running jessie, nor could he "switch to jessie" if he wanted
>> to. Once you've installed a single binary package from post-jessie,
>> there is no going back.
> 
> That will depend... on the dependencies :)
> 
> Of course, if some package from the N+1 distro pulls in something
> really fat, like, say libc, which upgrades half of your box (yes,
> that's doable: my box looks a bit like that at the moment), then
> your way back will be a bit... painful. 
Absolutely !! :) That's why I always check the proposed changes before
upgrading to a post-Stretch package to make sure that nothing that
drastic is going to be done.  There is a limit to how close to the edge
I will go!!  In fact, should the changes look too heavy, I also explore
going upstream and getting the source package for the newer version and
compiling it on the existing systemsometimes that will work,
sometimes it really needs the newer libraries that I suspect might break
the system.  In which case, I usually decide that bleeding edge probably
would cause too much blood loss!!
But if the package has no
> or very little dependencies, you just have to remember that apt
> (and most probably aptitude) have a natural aversion against
> downgrading packages and that you have to let them know that yes,
> you actually want to do such a seemingly foolish thing.
> 
> As Paracelsus put it once, "Sola dosis facit venenum" (i.e. "It's
> the dosis, stupid" ;-)
> 
> Cheers
> -- tomás
> 

-- 
73's,
WB5VQX -- The Very Quick X-ray



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: Apt Question

[Michael Milliman]

On 05/23/2017 03:57 AM, Fungi4All wrote:
> 
>>  Original Message 
>> Subject: Re: Apt Question
>> UTC Time: May 22, 2017 11:02 PM
>> From: songb...@anthive.com
>>
>> Michael Milliman wrote:
>> > I have, for various reasons, the repositories from stable (Jessie),
>> > stretch, and sid in my sources.list file. I have Stretch installed and
>> > have it running for some time. On occasion, there is a bug in Stretch
>> > and I revert to the stable version of the package until the bug gets
>> > worked out. I also, on occasion, use a more advanced version of the
>> > package and get it from sid (with a careful look at the proposed changes
>> > to the system when doing so). I have set synaptic to prefer the Stretch
>> > distribution. However, when I reload, and tell synaptic to mark all
>> > upgrades, it marks upgrades which it will pull from sid. Is there a way
>> > to tell synaptic to ignore those upgrades, while allowing me to manually
>> > install them should I wish to do so? I had thought that telling
>> > synaptic to prefer the Stretch distribution would have handled that, but
>> > I guess not. I figure I'm just missing something.
>>
>> you can always uncheck the apt lines for stretch,
>> and sid in the Settings -> Repositories and then do
>> an update to reload. then that will show you only
>> the versions available in Jessie. then any versions
>> you have upgraded beyond Jessie will show up as
>> Installed (local or obsolete) in the Status selection.
> 
> I don't know, I am not being sarcastic, is this really good practice?
>  If he is already running a sid linux kernel and some other core
Actually, I'm running Stretch, with occasional packages reverted to
jessie distribution, and other occasional packages advanced to sid
distribution.
> packages by switching to jessie he will be stuck with those packages
> almost indefinitely, if the system doesn't eventually break due to
> inconsistencies.  Meanwhile any security and important updates in jessie
> will not apply to all those testing and unstable till their version gets
> superseded, and if ever.  Let's say he has linux 4.9.. on and jessie
> does an upgrade to 3.20, and packages in jessie are checked to all work
> with 3.20.  Who says that their update will work with an outdated 4.9?
I assume (perhaps incorrectly) that packages that run on previous
kernels (3.16 say) will continue to work under new kernels (4.9). I have
not been bitten by this as of yet, though it is always a possibility.
As far as packages advanced to Sid distribution, I make no assumptions,
I try out the package, if it works, great, if not, I can always revert
it to Stretch or Jessie.  I always inspect the changes made to the
system when installing from Sid to make sure that the changes are not
likely to break the whole system.  Again, I have not been bitten by this
as of yet, though it is probable that I will be at some time :)


-- 
73's,
WB5VQX -- The Very Quick X-ray

Re: Apt Question

[tomas]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

On Tue, May 23, 2017 at 09:23:46AM -0400, Fungi4All wrote:
>  Original Message 
> Subject: Re: Apt Question
> UTC Time: May 23, 2017 11:54 AM
> From: wool...@eeg.ccf.org
> 
> > If he
> > is already running a sid linux kernel and some other core packages by
> > switching to jessie he will be stuck with those packages almost 
> > indefinitely,
> 
> He's not running jessie, nor could he "switch to jessie" if he wanted
> to. Once you've installed a single binary package from post-jessie,
> there is no going back.

That will depend... on the dependencies :)

Of course, if some package from the N+1 distro pulls in something
really fat, like, say libc, which upgrades half of your box (yes,
that's doable: my box looks a bit like that at the moment), then
your way back will be a bit... painful. But if the package has no
or very little dependencies, you just have to remember that apt
(and most probably aptitude) have a natural aversion against
downgrading packages and that you have to let them know that yes,
you actually want to do such a seemingly foolish thing.

As Paracelsus put it once, "Sola dosis facit venenum" (i.e. "It's
the dosis, stupid" ;-)

Cheers
- -- tomás
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux)

iEYEARECAAYFAlkkPV4ACgkQBcgs9XrR2kYo8wCfe9jWJO2SsFt6spVsUcQg25v7
hEQAnjiAs1Bqw+/OcrO5gRBAxYeE9Tcz
=YED9
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

Re: Apt Question

[Fungi4All]

 Original Message 
Subject: Re: Apt Question
UTC Time: May 23, 2017 11:54 AM
From: wool...@eeg.ccf.org

> If he
> is already running a sid linux kernel and some other core packages by
> switching to jessie he will be stuck with those packages almost indefinitely,

He's not running jessie, nor could he "switch to jessie" if he wanted
to. Once you've installed a single binary package from post-jessie,
there is no going back.

Doesn't it relate to how essential the package is for the system to continue 
running? With kernels beeing completely different packages it only matters 
which one you use to boot from. I don't think you can completely remove systemd 
and reinstall it. But something non essential that would only run when you call 
it you can completely remove and reinstall from jessie. But I agree that once 
you have moved up a notch there are too many packages to replace without 
crashing. I've never tried it but synaptics says you can select and force from 
which repository to keep. I don't know whether it is possible to revert this 
way, I'll be trying it soon if nobody says it doesn't work.

Likewise, once you have installed a single binary package from
post-stretch (e.g. sid), there is no going back.

I don't think this is completely true and always. I remember having something 
that was flaky in testing and switched repositories, installed one from 
unstable I think, it had the same problem, I didn't updgrade anything else, 
completely removed, readjusted sources.list and reinstalled the current 
package. But it was a package the system could live without. Maybe it just 
happened that its dependencies in testing and unstable were the same.

(AK)

Re: Apt Question

[Greg Wooledge]

On Tue, May 23, 2017 at 04:57:03AM -0400, Fungi4All wrote:
> Michael Milliman wrote:
> > I have, for various reasons, the repositories from stable (Jessie),
> > stretch, and sid in my sources.list file. I have Stretch installed and
> > have it running for some time.

> I don't know, I am not being sarcastic, is this really good practice?

I wouldn't advise it.  The stretch + jessie part is fine, as long as
he realizes he is running stretch, which seems to be the case.  Adding
sid binaries is not wise.  If he needs a package from post-stretch,
he should backport the sid *source* package to his stretch system.

> If he
> is already running a sid linux kernel and some other core packages by
> switching to jessie he will be stuck with those packages almost indefinitely,

He's not running jessie, nor could he "switch to jessie" if he wanted
to.  Once you've installed a single binary package from post-jessie,
there is no going back.

Likewise, once you have installed a single binary package from
post-stretch (e.g. sid), there is no going back.

Re: Apt Question

[Fungi4All]

 Original Message 
Subject: Re: Apt Question
UTC Time: May 22, 2017 11:02 PM
From: songb...@anthive.com

Michael Milliman wrote:
> I have, for various reasons, the repositories from stable (Jessie),
> stretch, and sid in my sources.list file. I have Stretch installed and
> have it running for some time. On occasion, there is a bug in Stretch
> and I revert to the stable version of the package until the bug gets
> worked out. I also, on occasion, use a more advanced version of the
> package and get it from sid (with a careful look at the proposed changes
> to the system when doing so). I have set synaptic to prefer the Stretch
> distribution. However, when I reload, and tell synaptic to mark all
> upgrades, it marks upgrades which it will pull from sid. Is there a way
> to tell synaptic to ignore those upgrades, while allowing me to manually
> install them should I wish to do so? I had thought that telling
> synaptic to prefer the Stretch distribution would have handled that, but
> I guess not. I figure I'm just missing something.

you can always uncheck the apt lines for stretch,
and sid in the Settings -> Repositories and then do
an update to reload. then that will show you only
the versions available in Jessie. then any versions
you have upgraded beyond Jessie will show up as
Installed (local or obsolete) in the Status selection.

I don't know, I am not being sarcastic, is this really good practice? If he is 
already running a sid linux kernel and some other core packages by switching to 
jessie he will be stuck with those packages almost indefinitely, if the system 
doesn't eventually break due to inconsistencies. Meanwhile any security and 
important updates in jessie will not apply to all those testing and unstable 
till their version gets superseded, and if ever. Let's say he has linux 4.9.. 
on and jessie does an upgrade to 3.20, and packages in jessie are checked to 
all work with 3.20. Who says that their update will work with an outdated 4.9?

Re: Apt Question

[songbird]

Michael Milliman wrote:
> I have, for various reasons, the repositories from stable (Jessie),
> stretch, and sid in my sources.list file. I have Stretch installed and
> have it running for some time.  On occasion, there is a bug in Stretch
> and I revert to the stable version of the package until the bug gets
> worked out.  I also, on occasion, use a more advanced version of the
> package and get it from sid (with a careful look at the proposed changes
> to the system when doing so).  I have set synaptic to prefer the Stretch
> distribution.  However, when I reload, and tell synaptic to mark all
> upgrades, it marks upgrades which it will pull from sid.  Is there a way
> to tell synaptic to ignore those upgrades, while allowing me to manually
> install them should I wish to do so?  I had thought that telling
> synaptic to prefer the Stretch distribution would have handled that, but
> I guess not.  I figure I'm just missing something.

  it seems to follow the version once you've
upgraded from a different repository.

  you can always uncheck the apt lines for stretch,
and sid in the Settings -> Repositories and then do 
an update to reload.  then that will show you only
the versions available in Jessie.  then any versions
you have upgraded beyond Jessie will show up as
Installed (local or obsolete) in the Status selection.


  songbird

Apt Question

[Michael Milliman]

I have, for various reasons, the repositories from stable (Jessie),
stretch, and sid in my sources.list file. I have Stretch installed and
have it running for some time.  On occasion, there is a bug in Stretch
and I revert to the stable version of the package until the bug gets
worked out.  I also, on occasion, use a more advanced version of the
package and get it from sid (with a careful look at the proposed changes
to the system when doing so).  I have set synaptic to prefer the Stretch
distribution.  However, when I reload, and tell synaptic to mark all
upgrades, it marks upgrades which it will pull from sid.  Is there a way
to tell synaptic to ignore those upgrades, while allowing me to manually
install them should I wish to do so?  I had thought that telling
synaptic to prefer the Stretch distribution would have handled that, but
I guess not.  I figure I'm just missing something.
-- 
73's,
WB5VQX -- The Very Quick X-ray

APT question

[Matt Parlane]

Hi all...

I couldn't think of an appropriate subject, so that will have to do...  :)

I have a couple of servers each with a bunch of packages installed,
and I would like some way of getting that exact bunch of packages
installed on a fresh Debian install.  Is there any way to get some
list of installed packages from the old machine and feed it into
apt-get on the new machine?

Cheers,

Matt


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: APT question

[Steve Kemp]

On Fri, Oct 06, 2006 at 10:11:29AM +1300, Matt Parlane wrote:

 I couldn't think of an appropriate subject, so that will have to do...  :)

  duplication package setup across machines ?

 I have a couple of servers each with a bunch of packages installed,
 and I would like some way of getting that exact bunch of packages
 installed on a fresh Debian install.  

  On the source machine:

dpkg --get-selections  /some/file

  Copy that file over to the new machine and then run:

dpkg --set-selections  /some/file
apt-get -u dselect-upgrade

  Or you could just export with:

 COLUMNS=200 dpkg --list | grep ^ii | awk ' {print $2}'  /tmp/file

  Then install naively after copying the file with:

apt-get install `cat /path/to/tmp/file`

Steve
-- 
Debian GNU/Linux System Administration
http://www.debian-administration.org/


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: APT question

[Roberto C. Sanchez]

On Fri, Oct 06, 2006 at 10:11:29AM +1300, Matt Parlane wrote:
 Hi all...
 
 I couldn't think of an appropriate subject, so that will have to do...  :)
 
 I have a couple of servers each with a bunch of packages installed,
 and I would like some way of getting that exact bunch of packages
 installed on a fresh Debian install.  Is there any way to get some
 list of installed packages from the old machine and feed it into
 apt-get on the new machine?
 

If you have done lots of customization, then consider systemimager.

If you just need the same packages installed and are not concerned so
much about configuration, then `dpkg --get-selections pkgs.out` will
create a text file with the package selections and then `dpkg
--set-selections pkgs.out` will set dpkg to try and install those same
packages the next time you do something, e.g., in aptitude.

Regards,

-Roberto

-- 
Roberto C. Sanchez
http://people.connexer.com/~roberto
http://www.connexer.com


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: APT question

[Maarten Verwijs]

Hi All...

On Thu, Oct 05, 2006 at 05:17:14PM -0400, Roberto C. Sanchez wrote:
 On Fri, Oct 06, 2006 at 10:11:29AM +1300, Matt Parlane wrote:
  Hi all...
  
  I couldn't think of an appropriate subject, so that will have to do...  :)
  
  I have a couple of servers each with a bunch of packages installed,
  and I would like some way of getting that exact bunch of packages
  installed on a fresh Debian install.  Is there any way to get some
  list of installed packages from the old machine and feed it into
  apt-get on the new machine?
  
 
 If you have done lots of customization, then consider systemimager.
 
 If you just need the same packages installed and are not concerned so
 much about configuration, then `dpkg --get-selections pkgs.out` will
 create a text file with the package selections and then `dpkg
 --set-selections pkgs.out` will set dpkg to try and install those same
 packages the next time you do something, e.g., in aptitude.

For some (or a lot actually) settings, you can use debconf: 

debconf-get-selections  debconfselections.txt
debconf-set-selctions  debconfselections.txt

You need to do this prior to dpkg --set-selections.

Kind regards, 

-- 
Maarten Verwijs 


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: APT question

[Andrei Popescu]

Roberto C. Sanchez [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 On Fri, Oct 06, 2006 at 10:11:29AM +1300, Matt Parlane wrote:
  Hi all...
  
  I couldn't think of an appropriate subject, so that will have to do...  :)
  
  I have a couple of servers each with a bunch of packages installed,
  and I would like some way of getting that exact bunch of packages
  installed on a fresh Debian install.  Is there any way to get some
  list of installed packages from the old machine and feed it into
  apt-get on the new machine?
  
 
 If you have done lots of customization, then consider systemimager.
 
 If you just need the same packages installed and are not concerned so
 much about configuration, then `dpkg --get-selections pkgs.out` will
 create a text file with the package selections and then `dpkg
 --set-selections pkgs.out` will set dpkg to try and install those same
 packages the next time you do something, e.g., in aptitude.

Or just run 'aptitude install'

Regards,
Andrei
-- 
If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough.
(Albert Einstein)


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Simple aptitude/apt question

[Andreas Janssen]

Hello

Hugh Crissman ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:

 How do I exclude a package when doing a upgrade. Say Postfix for
 example. I want to update all the packages on my system but I don't
 want to update Postfix. How would I do that?

You can set the package to hold usind aptitude or dselect or
dpkg --set-selections. You can also use pinning to set packages to a
specific version (see man apt_preferences).

best regards
Andreas Janssen

-- 
Andreas Janssen [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PGP-Key-ID: 0xDC801674 ICQ #17079270
Registered Linux User #267976
http://www.andreas-janssen.de/debian-tipps-sarge.html


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Simple aptitude/apt question

[Marc PERRUDIN]

Hugh Crissman a écrit :

 How do I exclude a package when doing a upgrade. Say Postfix for
 example. I want to update all the packages on my system but I don't
 want to update Postfix. How would I do that?

With aptitude, you select the package you don't want to upgrade and then
press the '=' key.
You can use dpkg too with a command like:

echo package_name hold | dpkg --set-selections

cu.



 HCrissman




-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Simple aptitude/apt question

[Hugh Crissman]

How do I exclude a package when doing a upgrade. Say Postfix for 
example. I want to update all the packages on my system but I don't want 
to update Postfix. How would I do that?


HCrissman


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

deep apt question

[John Smith]

Hi All,

like a lot of people I run a local apt repository combined with an
apt-proxy that caches a close official debian distribution server. My local
installation web server looks like:

/var/debian/
total 36
drwxr-xr-x   8 www-data www-data 4096 2005-11-11 19:41 .
drwxr-xr-x  16 root root 4096 2005-10-13 20:34 ..
lrwxrwxrwx   1 root root   27 2005-07-02 10:30 debian - 
/var/cache/apt-proxy/debian
lrwxrwxrwx   1 root root   37 2005-07-15 19:33 debian-backports - 
/var/cache/apt-proxy/debian-backports
drwxrwx---   4 www-data www-data 4096 2005-11-11 20:09 debian-local
lrwxrwxrwx   1 root root   37 2005-07-02 10:30 debian-security - 
/var/cache/apt-proxy/debian-security/

Like I wrote: the debian-local contains my own (and others ;-)) debs
that override official ones.

Now my problem:

[EMAIL PROTECTED]:/etc/apt apt-cache policy php4
php4:
  Installed: (none)
  Candidate: 4:4.3.10-16.2
  Version Table:
 4:4.3.10-16.2 0
500 http://debian sarge/main Packages
 4:4.3.10-16 0
500 http://debian sarge/updates/main Packages
 4:4.3.10-15 0
500 http://debian sarge/main Packages

How do I tell from which source directory (debian, debian-security 
or debian-local) each package is from without having to browse
my /var/debian?

Usually this is clear, but sometimes (usually after adding new foreign 
.deb's to debian-local) it isn't.

Somebody got a good idea?

Sincerely,

Jan.


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: apt question

[Justin Guerin]

On Wednesday 29 September 2004 20:29, Bradley Alexander wrote:
 Got a quick apt question. I had a DIMM go bad in my sid system, and
 thanks to having to hard reset it during troubleshooting, a couple of
 filesystems got trashed.

 I removed the bad DIMM, and was able to rebuild the filesystems
 (reiserfs). However, a slew of files (700+) got put in lost+found. Since
 the bulk of them were in /, it was mainly Debian packages.

 In order to make things right again, I ran debsums -s, and got all of the
 packages that either had missing files or bad md5sums on the files.

 Once I had my list, I did the following:

 [defiant ~]# apt-get install --ignore-missing --reinstall `cat deblist`
 In spiite of the --ignore-missing (many are older versions of packages
 that _should_ have been removed when the newer versions were installed),
 I got stuff like:

 Reinstallation of automake is not possible, it cannot be downloaded.
 Reinstallation of epan is not possible, it cannot be downloaded.
 Reinstallation of gnapster is not possible, it cannot be downloaded.
 Reinstallation of gtkhtml1.1 is not possible, it cannot be downloaded.
 ...
 Reinstallation of libgtkhtml1.1-3 is not possible, it cannot be
 downloaded. Reinstallation of libgtkhtml1.1-data is not possible, it
 cannot be downloaded. Reinstallation of libhdf5-serial is not possible,
 it cannot be downloaded. Package libid3-3.7-13 is not available, but is
 referred to by another package. This may mean that the package is
 missing, has been obsoleted, or is only available from another source
 E: Package libid3-3.7-13 has no installation candidate

 Is there a way to get around the messages above without individually
 removing them from the apt-get list (and the system)? And why doesn't
 --ignore-missing seem to work?
 --
 --Brad

Did you do an apt-get update first?  If so, are you sure that the errors 
you're seeing are from the --ignore-missing and not from the --reinstall 
flag?  What I mean is, --reinstall says to Re-Install packages that are 
already installed and at the newest version.  If a package can't be 
downloaded, it isn't at the newest version, so reinstall probably shouldn't 
work.  Ignore missing seems more geared towards new packages.  The 
combination may not be trying to do what you think it is, but a developer 
would be able to answer that for sure.

The error message about libid3-3.7-13 indicates either a packaging error, or 
your not up to date.  Also, it could be that package is in a different 
repository, which is not in your sources.list file.

Hope that helps,
Justin Guerin


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

apt question

[Bradley Alexander]

Got a quick apt question. I had a DIMM go bad in my sid system, and thanks to 
having to hard reset it during troubleshooting, a couple of filesystems got 
trashed.

I removed the bad DIMM, and was able to rebuild the filesystems (reiserfs). 
However, a slew of files (700+) got put in lost+found. Since the bulk of them 
were in /, it was mainly Debian packages. 

In order to make things right again, I ran debsums -s, and got all of the 
packages that either had missing files or bad md5sums on the files. 

Once I had my list, I did the following:

[defiant ~]# apt-get install --ignore-missing --reinstall `cat deblist`
In spiite of the --ignore-missing (many are older versions of packages that 
_should_ have been removed when the newer versions were installed), I got 
stuff like:

Reinstallation of automake is not possible, it cannot be downloaded.
Reinstallation of epan is not possible, it cannot be downloaded.
Reinstallation of gnapster is not possible, it cannot be downloaded.
Reinstallation of gtkhtml1.1 is not possible, it cannot be downloaded.
...
Reinstallation of libgtkhtml1.1-3 is not possible, it cannot be downloaded.
Reinstallation of libgtkhtml1.1-data is not possible, it cannot be downloaded.
Reinstallation of libhdf5-serial is not possible, it cannot be downloaded.
Package libid3-3.7-13 is not available, but is referred to by another package.
This may mean that the package is missing, has been obsoleted, or
is only available from another source
E: Package libid3-3.7-13 has no installation candidate

Is there a way to get around the messages above without individually removing 
them from the apt-get list (and the system)? And why doesn't --ignore-missing 
seem to work?
-- 
--Brad

Bradley M. Alexander   |
IA Analyst, SysAdmin, Security Engineer|   storm [at] tux.org

Key fingerprints:
DSA 0x54434E65: 37F6 BCA6 621D 920C E02E  E3C8 73B2 C019 5443 4E65
RSA 0xC3BCBA91: 3F 0E 26 C1 90 14 AD 0A  C8 9C F0 93 75 A0 01 34

As long as there are tests, there will be prayer in public schools.


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

RE: dpkg/apt question

[Preston Boyington]

Monique Y. Mudama wrote:
 
 Is there any particular reason that you don't want to use aptitude or
 dselect to interactively change the installed packages?
 
 --
 monique

sorry, there was more to the story than i guess i led you to believe.  here's a bit 
more information.

the existing debian box that i was given is basically a test machine.  the company 
wanted to see if there was an efficient way of getting machines used here to a 
baseline setup.  if this could be done without reinstalling then we could keep the 
machines running Debian.  if not, then another distribution would be chosen (i don't 
pretend to understand the reasoning for their thinking about changing).

wanting to establish a baseline for the packages we took a fresh box, loaded only 
what would be used, and generated a package list.

using the commands with the generated package list:

dpkg --set-selections  packages.txt
apt-get dselect-upgrade

we showed how easy it was to totally change the test bed of machines (initially one, 
then five).

we are now going to roll out these changes to all our machines in this complex (30+) 
and another 15-20 machines in two satellite offices.


thanks all,
Preston

RE: dpkg/apt question

[RickTaylor]

 we are now going to roll out these changes to all our machines in this complex (30+) 
 and another 15-20 machines in two satellite offices.
  
 thanks all,
 Preston

There are a large number of utility programs just in case you're unaware of them.
Stuff to let you do ongoing package management, etc. 

From their listings {Their search engine's down.} Most of these have much
more functionality than the name implies:

apt-move (4.1.21) Move cache of Debian packages into a mirror hierarchy
apt-proxy (1.3.0) Debian archive proxy and partial mirror builder
apt-show-source (0.06-3) Shows source-package information
apt-show-versions (0.03) Lists available package versions with distribution
apt-spy (2.3-2) writes a sources.list file based on bandwidth tests.
apt-utils (0.5.4.0.1 [s390], 0.5.4 [alpha, arm, hppa, i386, ia64, m68k, mips, mipsel, 
powerpc, sparc])
APT utility programs:

usr/bin/apt-extracttemplatesadmin/apt-utils
usr/bin/apt-ftparchive  admin/apt-utils
usr/bin/apt-sortpkgsadmin/apt-utils

apt-zip (0.13.2) Update a non-networked computer using apt and removable media

dpkg-ftp (1.6.10) Ftp method for dselect. 
dpkg-multicd (0.18) Installation methods for multiple binary CDs
dpkg-repack (1.8) puts an unpacked .deb file back together

 ...
This message has been brought to you in part by a grant from Columba.


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

dpkg/apt question

[Preston Boyington]

i have inherited an existing debian box and want to change the packages to suit me 
and the office that it will now be used.

i would like to take the installed packages listed from:

dpkg --get-selections  packages.txt

and edit the file to reflect what i actually want/need on the box.

after i get the edited list prepared, is there a command i can issue that will 
instruct apt or dpkg to add/remove the programs to reflect my changes?

on a fresh install i would do:

dpkg --set-selections  packages.txt

then:

apt-get install

but i don't know the command to do this from a existing setup.

would someone shed some light on this for me?

thanks,
Preston

Re: dpkg/apt question

[Thomas Adam]

--- Preston Boyington [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 

 dpkg --set-selections  packages.txt
 
 then:
 
 apt-get install
^^^

Wrong. You want to do:

apt-get dselect-upgrade

-- Thomas Adam

=
The Linux Weekend Mechanic -- http://linuxgazette.net
TAG Editor -- http://linuxgazette.net

shrug We'll just save up your sins, Thomas, and punish 
you for all of them at once when you get better. The 
experience will probably kill you. :)

 -- Benjamin A. Okopnik (Linux Gazette Technical Editor)





___ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - 
so many all-new ways to express yourself http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: dpkg/apt question

[Monique Y. Mudama]

On 2004-07-22, Preston Boyington penned:
 i have inherited an existing debian box and want to change the
 packages to suit me and the office that it will now be used.

 i would like to take the installed packages listed from:

 dpkg --get-selections  packages.txt

 and edit the file to reflect what i actually want/need on the box.

 after i get the edited list prepared, is there a command i can issue
 that will instruct apt or dpkg to add/remove the programs to reflect
 my changes?

 on a fresh install i would do:

 dpkg --set-selections  packages.txt

 then:

 apt-get install

 but i don't know the command to do this from a existing setup.

 would someone shed some light on this for me?

 thanks, Preston

Is there any particular reason that you don't want to use aptitude or
dselect to interactively change the installed packages?

-- 
monique


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: apt question

[Mark Healey]

On Thu, 04 Dec 2003 21:26:03 -0600, Kent West wrote:

Mark Healey wrote:

On Thu, 04 Dec 2003 20:10:26 -0600, Kent West wrote:


Did you apt-get update first? If not, you need to.



Thanks.  I could swear that wasn't in the man page.



enjae[westk]:/home/westk man apt-get
. . .
DESCRIPTION
   apt-get is the command-line tool for handling packages, and may
be con-
. . .
   update update  is  used  to  resynchronize the package index
files from
. . .
  updated packages is available. *An update should always
be  per-
  formed  before  an upgrade or dist-upgrade.* Please be
aware that


(Emphasis added.) But of course, this is on a sid box; it may not be in
the stable version of the man page. And even so, it's quite easy to miss.

No, I think I'm just going blind.

-
Please leave this.  It is a filter term.
ferulebezel
-
Mark Healey
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Don't bothor CCing or emailing this address.  Since spammers seem to be harvesting this
list anything that doesn't come from the list server is assumed to be spam and deleted.
ASUS A87V8X mobo w AMD Athalon
Broadcom 4401 onboard nic
with static IP Address
ATI All-In-Wonder 9700 Video card.
Sampo Alphascan 17mx monitor


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

apt question

[Mark Healey]

On Thu, 13 Nov 2003 20:53:35 -0600, Kent West wrote:

As you recommended I added these lines to my /etc/apt/sources.list:


 # Uncomment if you want the apt-get source function to work
which I did
 #deb-src http://http.us.debian.org/debian stable main contrib non-free
 #deb-src http://non-us.debian.org/debian-non-US stable non-US

 # Stable
 deb http://http.us.debian.org/debian/ stable main non-free contrib
 deb http://non-us.debian.org/debian-non-US stable/non-US main contrib non-free
 deb http://security.debian.org/ stable/updates main contrib non-free

Just to check things out I did apt-cache search nethack to see if
everything is working.  It's not.

I get:
W: Couldn't stat source package list [an entry from above] Packages
([a path which I assume is what the listing is a symbolic link to]) -
stat (2 No such file or directory).

I added the lines above the CDrom entries.

What's up?

-
Please leave this.  It is a filter term.
ferulebezel
-
Mark Healey
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Don't bothor CCing or emailing this address.  Since spammers seem to be harvesting this
list anything that doesn't come from the list server is assumed to be spam and deleted.
ASUS A87V8X mobo w AMD Athalon
Broadcom 4401 onboard nic
with static IP Address
ATI All-In-Wonder 9700 Video card.
Sampo Alphascan 17mx monitor


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: apt question

[Kent West]

Mark Healey wrote:

On Thu, 13 Nov 2003 20:53:35 -0600, Kent West wrote:

As you recommended I added these lines to my /etc/apt/sources.list:

 

# Uncomment if you want the apt-get source function to work
 

which I did
 

#deb-src http://http.us.debian.org/debian stable main contrib non-free
#deb-src http://non-us.debian.org/debian-non-US stable non-US
 

 

# Stable
deb http://http.us.debian.org/debian/ stable main non-free contrib
deb http://non-us.debian.org/debian-non-US stable/non-US main contrib non-free
deb http://security.debian.org/ stable/updates main contrib non-free
 

Just to check things out I did apt-cache search nethack to see if
everything is working.  It's not.
I get:
W: Couldn't stat source package list [an entry from above] Packages
([a path which I assume is what the listing is a symbolic link to]) -
stat (2 No such file or directory).
 

Did you apt-get update first? If not, you need to.

If that doesn't solve the problem, comment out all but one line and run 
apt-get update again. Then add lines back in and repeat until you find 
the line with the problem. Let us know which line it is and we'll go 
from there.

I added the lines above the CDrom entries.

What's up?

-
Please leave this.  It is a filter term.
ferulebezel
-
 



--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: apt question

[Mark Healey]

On Thu, 04 Dec 2003 20:10:26 -0600, Kent West wrote:

Mark Healey wrote:

On Thu, 13 Nov 2003 20:53:35 -0600, Kent West wrote:

As you recommended I added these lines to my /etc/apt/sources.list:




# Uncomment if you want the apt-get source function to work


which I did


#deb-src http://http.us.debian.org/debian stable main contrib non-free
#deb-src http://non-us.debian.org/debian-non-US stable non-US





# Stable
deb http://http.us.debian.org/debian/ stable main non-free contrib
deb http://non-us.debian.org/debian-non-US stable/non-US main contrib non-free
deb http://security.debian.org/ stable/updates main contrib non-free



Just to check things out I did apt-cache search nethack to see if
everything is working.  It's not.

I get:
W: Couldn't stat source package list [an entry from above] Packages
([a path which I assume is what the listing is a symbolic link to]) -
stat (2 No such file or directory).



Did you apt-get update first? If not, you need to.

Thanks.  I could swear that wasn't in the man page.

-
Please leave this.  It is a filter term.
ferulebezel
-
Mark Healey
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Don't bothor CCing or emailing this address.  Since spammers seem to be harvesting this
list anything that doesn't come from the list server is assumed to be spam and deleted.
ASUS A87V8X mobo w AMD Athalon
Broadcom 4401 onboard nic
with static IP Address
ATI All-In-Wonder 9700 Video card.
Sampo Alphascan 17mx monitor


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: apt question

[Kent West]

Mark Healey wrote:

On Thu, 04 Dec 2003 20:10:26 -0600, Kent West wrote:
 

Did you apt-get update first? If not, you need to.
   

Thanks.  I could swear that wasn't in the man page.

 

enjae[westk]:/home/westk man apt-get
. . .
DESCRIPTION
  apt-get is the command-line tool for handling packages, and may 
be con-
. . .
  update update  is  used  to  resynchronize the package index 
files from
. . .
 updated packages is available. *An update should always  
be  per-
 formed  before  an upgrade or dist-upgrade.* Please be 
aware that
  

(Emphasis added.) But of course, this is on a sid box; it may not be in 
the stable version of the man page. And even so, it's quite easy to miss.

-
Please leave this.  It is a filter term.
ferulebezel
 



--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Theoretical APT question

[Karsten M. Self]

on Fri, Nov 21, 2003 at 03:36:26PM +, Ken Gilmour ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
 Replying to the message sent by Karsten M. Self ?on Thu, 20 Nov 2003 19:51:35 -0800, 
 received at 15:32:59 on 21/11/2003. Karsten M. Self wrote:
 snip
 
 Much of your objective could be attained via a reasonable partitioning
 scheme. ?The existing Debian Policy specification of what files go where
 already makes system backup and restoration trivial.
 
 Peace.
 
 I accomplished similar to this by simply using symlinks. For example,
 all of my websites and logs were in /var/www/html and that partition
 was getting full, so i added a new drive, gave it one large partition,
 moved everything onto it set a symlink called html and removed the old
 directory called html (not in that order)

Why not simply mount that new drive as /var/www/html?

Granted, if you wanted to provide additional storage from the new drive,
you could have.  But you can slice (partition) a disk as you want, and
mount these to any arbitrary directory within the system directory
tree.  /, /tmp, /usr, /var, /home, etc., are just conventions.  You
could mount to /usr/share/doc if you wanted to (I'd call you crazy, but
you could do it...).

Peace.

-- 
Karsten M. Self [EMAIL PROTECTED]http://kmself.home.netcom.com/
 What Part of Gestalt don't you understand?
  Backgrounder on the Caldera/SCO vs. IBM and Linux dispute.
  http://sco.iwethey.org/


pgp0.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: Theoretical APT question

[Ken Gilmour]

Replying to the message sent by Karsten M. Self  on Thu, 20 Nov 2003 19:51:35 -0800, 
received at 15:32:59 on 21/11/2003. Karsten M. Self wrote:
snip

Much of your objective could be attained via a reasonable partitioning
scheme.  The existing Debian Policy specification of what files go where
already makes system backup and restoration trivial.

Peace.

I accomplished similar to this by simply using symlinks. For example, all of my 
websites and logs were in /var/www/html and that partition was getting full, so i 
added a new drive, gave it one large partition, moved everything onto it set a symlink 
called html and removed the old directory called html (not in that order)

Took me about 5 minutes



--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Theoretical APT question

[Karsten M. Self]

on Sat, Nov 15, 2003 at 02:01:42PM -0800, Wm.G.McGrath ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
 
 Hi,
 
 Is there any way I can reset the directory/partition that apt uses
 to install software? I believe it currently install packages under
 /usr... and /var
 
 The history of *nix is very diverse and reflected in the (needless?)
 complexity of its directory structure. /usr is very large and used
 for many purposes, and I'd like to move a little beyond it's current
 default - at least for my own system. 
 
 I'd like to be able to set up a separate partition/directory to
 contain all the software that I install using apt for security,
 backup and upgrade purposes. The advantage of this would be similar
 to using a separate partition/directory for /home, /opt or
 /usr/local.
 
 Thus, for example, I'll be able to upgrade my base system without
 affecting my packages and upgrade them later, one at a time, at
 my leisure if I wish. (Yes I know there are other ways of doing
 this.)
 
 A separate partition could also provide advantages for backup and
 security, but what I'm really interested in is in keeping things
 well organized and neat. I'd like to create a partition something
 like /apt with subdirectories like /apt/bin, /apt/opt,
 /apt/usr/local, etc. It might even be nice to put each app/utiltity
 in its own directory? :)
 
 Anyway, does anyone have any thoughts on this? Does apt rely on any
 environment variables for example?

You're bonkers.  And I mean that in the nicest possible way.

As others have stated:  DEBs are not relocatable.  For good reason.

If you want to maintain a separate install root, look at a chroot
install or jail.  Or a system2 installation with a base set of
security/recovery utilities (I've posted about same in recent past on
list, with a pointer to my own packages list).

Much of your objective could be attained via a reasonable partitioning
scheme.  The existing Debian Policy specification of what files go where
already makes system backup and restoration trivial.

Peace.

-- 
Karsten M. Self [EMAIL PROTECTED]http://kmself.home.netcom.com/
 What Part of Gestalt don't you understand?
Just another million years, said Marvin, just another quick
million. Then I might try it backwards. Just for the variety, you
understand.
-- HHGTG


pgp0.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: Theoretical APT question

[Paul E Condon]

On Mon, Nov 17, 2003 at 02:49:22AM -0800, Wm.G.McGrath wrote:
 On Sat, 15 Nov 2003 17:58:47 -0700
 Paul E Condon [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 : 
 : I don't know the answer to your question, but:
 : 
 : The thing that really sold me on switching from RH to Debian was a
 : document called File Heirarchy Standard. FHS sets out in great
 : detail exactly where every type of file should be placed on a
 : Debian machine, and why. You should really read and understand
 : that document before you start re-inventing the wheel. A lot of
 : thinking, discussion, and argument went into producing FHS. I
 : suppose that it could be improved upon, but you really need to be
 : intimately familiar with it, if you are going to have a chance of
 : success. There are all sorts of considerations that get ignored in
 : a first pass design. Educate yourself before you launch into
 : shuffling things around. 
 
 Yeah, I read it many years ago - before there were package managers
 I think. It's gone basically nowhere because IMHO it tries to

I don't think gone ... nowhere is at all accurate. In Debian, a
package that does not comply with Debian Policy does not get into
the distribution. If, by accident, it does get in, its lack of 
compliance is a legitimate reason for a bug report. That the rest of
the world does not seem to pay much attention to issues of policy is
a problem with the rest of the world, not with Debian. 

But there is always a possibility that policy might be improved, so if
you have an idea as to how FHS might be improved, by all means pursue
it.

 shoehorn everyone into the same standard. Desktops, servers,

Of course, 'everyone' does not run Debian, but those that do often
find the freedom from worry about old, stupid problems to be a good
thing.

 single-disk systems, multi-disk systems, disk-array systems, NFS
 systems and so on. There's no way one standard can serve everyone's
 best interest. AFAIK distros don't even make use of FHS dirs
 like/usr/local and /opt on installation. So why should I adhere to
 it? Originally, /usr served the same purpose as /home does today,
 but now you've got tons of software installed there too. Messy.
 
 I don't want to re-invent the wheel, but I would like to have
 options. Most of the structure is the way it is for good historical
 reasons and I accept that. Some people are going to need to keep
 things exactly the way they are. If someone needs to use /usr/local
 under NFS be my guest. But if I'm not running NFS..well choice
 is what linux is about - at least limited choice. All I'm looking
 for is a better way to use apt and install software - something more
 in tune with my needs.
 
 And yes educating myself it what I'm doing by asking questions.
 
   Thanks for the advice,
 
   bill

Lots of Leonardo deVinci's notes are in cursive script, written
right-to-left, rather than left-to-right. Doing things a different
way is certainly *not* a sign of lack of intelligence. Go for it!
now that you've been warned. 

-- 
Paul E Condon   
[EMAIL PROTECTED]


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Theoretical APT question

[Wm . G . McGrath]

On Sun, 16 Nov 2003 01:04:42 +
Colin Watson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

: Debian packages aren't relocatable, I'm afraid. Their maintainer
: scripts frequently contain absolute paths or call other utilities
: that expect certain absolute paths, and changing this would be a
: ginormous amount of effort that isn't likely to happen any time
: soon.

Bummer. I didn't want to mess with the base system libraries,
utilities, /bin, /sbin etc, just the optional software. I can
certainly see that basic systemic functionality requires a ridgid
sub/superstructure. I had hoped that a couple of additions to my
$PATH and a few symlinks would have solved the problem. It's the
configurable side that I wanted to be able to protect from system
upgrades - the same as my/home data. I don't like 'blanket' upgrades
where you've got to reconfigure many essential progs from scratch
again. Seems like such a waste of time.

: This isn't specific to apt; it's inherent in the structure of our
: current packaging scheme (so closer to dpkg than apt). Sorry.

Hmmm. Do you know if tarballs would suffer from the same problem?
This might be a good reason to experiment with LFS. Or not. Perhaps
I could remove the dpkg version of a prg, but install the tarball in
a /pkg directory using the -root /otherroot option on installpkg.
Have the best of both worlds so to speak. Apt for a base system,
tarballs for configurables. Add /pkg, /pkg/bin to $PATH, and so on.
Or would two package managers conflict do you think? Can a two
directory system work? Is /bin,/usr/bin, and /pkg/bin any different
from what we have now? I'd like to stick with apt if I can. :)

Checking the dpkg man page as you suggest, I find dpkg has similar
options with --root, --admindir and --instdir. Do these options
create a second 'root' directory or merely move complete /usr
functionality to /otherroot? In other words, do they create a one or
two directory system (/usr plus /otherroot) and will a two directory
system work?

: In the special case where you want to move *everything* to a
: particular tree, then you could use a chroot.
: 
No not everything. /usr has become a catchall unforturnately.

Anyway I appreciate your comments. Thanks.

bill


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Theoretical APT question

[Wm . G . McGrath]

On Sat, 15 Nov 2003 17:58:47 -0700
Paul E Condon [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
: 
: I don't know the answer to your question, but:
: 
: The thing that really sold me on switching from RH to Debian was a
: document called File Heirarchy Standard. FHS sets out in great
: detail exactly where every type of file should be placed on a
: Debian machine, and why. You should really read and understand
: that document before you start re-inventing the wheel. A lot of
: thinking, discussion, and argument went into producing FHS. I
: suppose that it could be improved upon, but you really need to be
: intimately familiar with it, if you are going to have a chance of
: success. There are all sorts of considerations that get ignored in
: a first pass design. Educate yourself before you launch into
: shuffling things around. 

Yeah, I read it many years ago - before there were package managers
I think. It's gone basically nowhere because IMHO it tries to
shoehorn everyone into the same standard. Desktops, servers,
single-disk systems, multi-disk systems, disk-array systems, NFS
systems and so on. There's no way one standard can serve everyone's
best interest. AFAIK distros don't even make use of FHS dirs
like/usr/local and /opt on installation. So why should I adhere to
it? Originally, /usr served the same purpose as /home does today,
but now you've got tons of software installed there too. Messy.

I don't want to re-invent the wheel, but I would like to have
options. Most of the structure is the way it is for good historical
reasons and I accept that. Some people are going to need to keep
things exactly the way they are. If someone needs to use /usr/local
under NFS be my guest. But if I'm not running NFS..well choice
is what linux is about - at least limited choice. All I'm looking
for is a better way to use apt and install software - something more
in tune with my needs.

And yes educating myself it what I'm doing by asking questions.

Thanks for the advice,

bill


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Theoretical APT question

[Colin Watson]

On Mon, Nov 17, 2003 at 02:49:22AM -0800, Wm. G. McGrath wrote:
 On Sat, 15 Nov 2003 17:58:47 -0700
 Paul E Condon [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 : The thing that really sold me on switching from RH to Debian was a
 : document called File Heirarchy Standard. FHS sets out in great
 : detail exactly where every type of file should be placed on a
 : Debian machine, and why. You should really read and understand
 : that document before you start re-inventing the wheel. A lot of
 : thinking, discussion, and argument went into producing FHS. I
 : suppose that it could be improved upon, but you really need to be
 : intimately familiar with it, if you are going to have a chance of
 : success. There are all sorts of considerations that get ignored in
 : a first pass design. Educate yourself before you launch into
 : shuffling things around. 
 
 Yeah, I read it many years ago - before there were package managers
 I think. It's gone basically nowhere because IMHO it tries to
 shoehorn everyone into the same standard.

Gone nowhere? It's used by all the major Linux distributions ...

 Desktops, servers, single-disk systems, multi-disk systems, disk-array
 systems, NFS systems and so on. There's no way one standard can serve
 everyone's best interest. AFAIK distros don't even make use of FHS
 dirs like/usr/local and /opt on installation.

Distributions aren't supposed to. Those directories are for the use of
the local sysadmin.

Cheers,

-- 
Colin Watson  [EMAIL PROTECTED]


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Theoretical APT question

[Wm . G . McGrath]

Hi,

Is there any way I can reset the directory/partition that apt uses
to install software? I believe it currently install packages under
/usr... and /var

The history of *nix is very diverse and reflected in the (needless?)
complexity of its directory structure. /usr is very large and used
for many purposes, and I'd like to move a little beyond it's current
default - at least for my own system. 

I'd like to be able to set up a separate partition/directory to
contain all the software that I install using apt for security,
backup and upgrade purposes. The advantage of this would be similar
to using a separate partition/directory for /home, /opt or
/usr/local.

Thus, for example, I'll be able to upgrade my base system without
affecting my packages and upgrade them later, one at a time, at
my leisure if I wish. (Yes I know there are other ways of doing
this.)

A separate partition could also provide advantages for backup and
security, but what I'm really interested in is in keeping things
well organized and neat. I'd like to create a partition something
like /apt with subdirectories like /apt/bin, /apt/opt,
/apt/usr/local, etc. It might even be nice to put each app/utiltity
in its own directory? :)

Anyway, does anyone have any thoughts on this? Does apt rely on any
environment variables for example?

tia,

bill


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Theoretical APT question

[Paul E Condon]

On Sat, Nov 15, 2003 at 02:01:42PM -0800, Wm.G.McGrath wrote:
 
 Hi,
 
 Is there any way I can reset the directory/partition that apt uses
 to install software? I believe it currently install packages under
 /usr... and /var
 
 The history of *nix is very diverse and reflected in the (needless?)
 complexity of its directory structure. /usr is very large and used
 for many purposes, and I'd like to move a little beyond it's current
 default - at least for my own system. 
 
 I'd like to be able to set up a separate partition/directory to
 contain all the software that I install using apt for security,
 backup and upgrade purposes. The advantage of this would be similar
 to using a separate partition/directory for /home, /opt or
 /usr/local.
 
 Thus, for example, I'll be able to upgrade my base system without
 affecting my packages and upgrade them later, one at a time, at
 my leisure if I wish. (Yes I know there are other ways of doing
 this.)
 
 A separate partition could also provide advantages for backup and
 security, but what I'm really interested in is in keeping things
 well organized and neat. I'd like to create a partition something
 like /apt with subdirectories like /apt/bin, /apt/opt,
 /apt/usr/local, etc. It might even be nice to put each app/utiltity
 in its own directory? :)
 
 Anyway, does anyone have any thoughts on this? Does apt rely on any
 environment variables for example?
 

I don't know the answer to your question, but:

The thing that really sold me on switching from RH to Debian was a
document called File Heirarchy Standard. FHS sets out in great detail
exactly where every type of file should be placed on a Debian machine,
and why. You should really read and understand that document before
you start re-inventing the wheel. A lot of thinking, discussion, and
argument went into producing FHS. I suppose that it could be improved
upon, but you really need to be intimately familiar with it, if you
are going to have a chance of success. There are all sorts of
considerations that get ignored in a first pass design. Educate
yourself before you launch into shuffling things around. 

Off hand, I suppose that it would be nearly impossible to write a tool
that takes a set of install scripts from a Debian package and
transforms them into scripts that would work correctly with some other
file placement standard. 

Just my $.02.

-- 
Paul E Condon   
[EMAIL PROTECTED]


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Theoretical APT question

[Colin Watson]

On Sat, Nov 15, 2003 at 02:01:42PM -0800, Wm. G. McGrath wrote:
 Is there any way I can reset the directory/partition that apt uses
 to install software? I believe it currently install packages under
 /usr... and /var

Debian packages aren't relocatable, I'm afraid. Their maintainer scripts
frequently contain absolute paths or call other utilities that expect
certain absolute paths, and changing this would be a ginormous amount of
effort that isn't likely to happen any time soon.

This isn't specific to apt; it's inherent in the structure of our
current packaging scheme (so closer to dpkg than apt). Sorry.

In the special case where you want to move *everything* to a particular
tree, then you could use a chroot.

Cheers,

-- 
Colin Watson  [EMAIL PROTECTED]


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: apt question: exclude certain packages from upgrading?

[Rohan Nicholls]

At 01 Oct 2003 14:47:58 +0200,
JG wrote:
 
 Hi,
 Put the package on hold. Select your package on dselect or aptitude
 and press = to put it on hold. Or
 
 $ echo pptp-client hold | dpkg --set-selections
 
 This will keep the package at the current version (unless you
 intentionally install a new version)

Thanks this worked like a charm, upgraded and everything.:-)

 
 You can also assign priorities to certain versions of packages, by
 assigning Pin priorities in /etc/apt/preferences . Read
 
 $ man apt_preferences

Next on my list of research, I noticed it mentioned in a tutorial, but
not enough detail to really get the hang of it.

 Hope this helps,

Very much, thanks again.

rohan


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

apt question: exclude certain packages from upgrading?

[Rohan Nicholls]

Hi all, 

Happily back on debian again and with it more questions...:)

Question: Is there a way to tell apt to never upgrade a certain package?
while upgrading everything
else?

Details:
I have to use pptp-client to connect to my adsl provider.  This in itself is
not a problem, 
but the only version that works is in the stable collection of packages.

I am running unstable/testing for most packages, and I am loving it, however
for pptp-client
to work I need to have pptp, pppd, and the mppe patch in the kernel at the
same level.

mppe patch in kernel - I have this from the kernel-patch-mppe package
The same version of mppe patch in pppd - in stable this works fine, but 
updating to a more recent version of pppd breaks the pptp/pppd cooperation.

So what I would like to do is install/keep the stable ppp package, keep the
pptp-client as it is,
and the kernel has already been recompiled with the needed bits and pieces,
and is humming
along nicely, and be able to upgrade everything else without messing with
ppp.

Tia, and another question 

Rohan Nicholls

www.AnswerWeb.nl
tel +31(0)20 - 4121407
fax +31(0)20 - 6897895
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

AnswerWeb
Prinsengracht 468
1017 KG Amsterdam
The Netherlands


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

apt question (downgrading and installing from source)

[Chris Kenrick]

In order to get a few packages to the versions I wanted them at, I ended
up using packages from unstable.  Unfortunately, I ended up getting
libc6 and a few other important ones.  Now I'm seeing various errors
sporadically that I suspect are related to this upgrade.

First question, what's the easiest way of working out what to revert
back to?  Ideally I need to be able to work out which packages installed
on my system don't match the ones in my sources list.  Once I do that,
I'll get rid of the packages that require libc6 and so on, and manually
downgrade.

Second question, one I've got back to a stable system, I'm wanting to
install some of the unstable packages by downloading unstable source and
then compiling it into a custom package.  What's the best way to do
this, for example, for vorbis-tools?

- Chris
__
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now.
http://mailplus.yahoo.com


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: apt question (downgrading and installing from source)

[Sven Bornemann]

Chris Kenrick wrote:


In order to get a few packages to the versions I wanted them at, I ended
up using packages from unstable.  Unfortunately, I ended up getting
libc6 and a few other important ones.  Now I'm seeing various errors
sporadically that I suspect are related to this upgrade.

First question, what's the easiest way of working out what to revert
back to?  Ideally I need to be able to work out which packages installed
on my system don't match the ones in my sources list.  Once I do that,
I'll get rid of the packages that require libc6 and so on, and manually
downgrade.

Second question, one I've got back to a stable system, I'm wanting to
install some of the unstable packages by downloading unstable source and
then compiling it into a custom package.  What's the best way to do
this, for example, for vorbis-tools?

- Chris
__
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now.
http://mailplus.yahoo.com


 

For your fist problem there seems to be something on

http://www.debianplanet.org

look here...

http://www.debianplanet.org/node.php?id=880

How to build debian packages for your own
system is described here...

http://www.kclee.com/clemens/unix/HowToCreateYourOwnDebianPackage.html


Sven


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Apt question

[David Bell]

It's easy, and helpful. :)

Create/Add...

Package: *
Pin: release a=testing
Pin-priority: 900

Package: *
Pin: release a=unstable
Pin-priority: 50

...To your /etc/apt/preferences, and add a sid source at the end of your
/etc/apt/sources.list.  If you're using potato, you'd change the 'Pin:
release a=testing' line to 'Pin: release a=stable'.

With that done, to install a package[s] from sid, use apt-get -t
unstable install whatever.  If I made any big errors, someone correct
me. :)

On Tue, 2002-01-22 at 19:23, Scott Henson wrote:
 A few weeks ago I heard something about pinning in apt.  If I remember
 correctly you can put sid in your sources.list and pin its urgency down
 to 50 and there for you could install stuff in sid with out upgradeing
 to sid.  Or something to that effect.  Ive looked through the archives,
 but I cant find it.  I have also looked through the apt man pages, but I
 havent found it yet.  If someone knows where I could find out how to use
 this, or just tell me how to do it, I would be very gracious.
 
 
 -- 
 -Scott Henson
 
 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 
  Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty: power is ever stealing from
 the many to the few.  The manna of popular liberty must be gathered each
 day, or it is rotten... The
 hand entrusted with power becomes, either from human depravity or esprit
 de corps, the necessary enemy of the people.  Only by continual
 oversight can the democrat in office be
 prevented from hardening into a despot: only by unintermitted agitation
 can a people be kept sufficiently awake to principle not to let liberty
 be smothered in material
 prosperity... Never look, for an age when the people can be quiet and
 safe.  At such times despotism, like a shrouding mist, steals over the
 mirror of Freedom  - Wendell
 Phillips
 
 
 
 -- 
 To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
 with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 

Apt question

[Scott Henson]

A few weeks ago I heard something about pinning in apt.  If I remember
correctly you can put sid in your sources.list and pin its urgency down
to 50 and there for you could install stuff in sid with out upgradeing
to sid.  Or something to that effect.  Ive looked through the archives,
but I cant find it.  I have also looked through the apt man pages, but I
havent found it yet.  If someone knows where I could find out how to use
this, or just tell me how to do it, I would be very gracious.


-- 
-Scott Henson

[EMAIL PROTECTED]

 Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty: power is ever stealing from
the many to the few.  The manna of popular liberty must be gathered each
day, or it is rotten... The
hand entrusted with power becomes, either from human depravity or esprit
de corps, the necessary enemy of the people.  Only by continual
oversight can the democrat in office be
prevented from hardening into a despot: only by unintermitted agitation
can a people be kept sufficiently awake to principle not to let liberty
be smothered in material
prosperity... Never look, for an age when the people can be quiet and
safe.  At such times despotism, like a shrouding mist, steals over the
mirror of Freedom  - Wendell
Phillips

Re: Apt question

[dman]

On Tue, Jan 22, 2002 at 08:23:51PM -0500, Scott Henson wrote:
| A few weeks ago I heard something about pinning in apt.  If I remember
| correctly you can put sid in your sources.list and pin its urgency down
| to 50 and there for you could install stuff in sid with out upgradeing
| to sid.  Or something to that effect.  Ive looked through the archives,
| but I cant find it.  I have also looked through the apt man pages, but I
| havent found it yet.  If someone knows where I could find out how to use
| this, or just tell me how to do it, I would be very gracious.

Osamu has a good document on it.  It's where I got my info from.  I
can't seem to find exactly the page I'm looking for, but here are some
URLs:

http://qref.sourceforge.net/quick/index.en.html

http://qref.sourceforge.net/quick/ch-woody.en.html
http://qref.sourceforge.net/quick/ch-package.en.html

-D

-- 

Microsoft DNS service terminates abnormally when it receives a response
to a dns query that was never made.
Fix information: run your DNS service on a different platform.
-- bugtraq

Re: Apt question

[Bob Underwood]

On Tuesday 22 January 2002 20:23, Scott Henson wrote:
 A few weeks ago I heard something about pinning in apt.  If I remember
 correctly you can put sid in your sources.list and pin its urgency down
 to 50 and there for you could install stuff in sid with out upgradeing
 to sid.  Or something to that effect.  Ive looked through the archives,
 but I cant find it.  I have also looked through the apt man pages, but I
 havent found it yet.  If someone knows where I could find out how to use
 this, or just tell me how to do it, I would be very gracious.

Manual page is man apt_preferences

hth

bob

Re: Apt preferences (was Re: apt question)

[Bill Wohler]

Osamu Aoki [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
 Also apt-get install apt-howto/unstable

  Sweet! Thanks.

  Armed with new information, I would interpret the following stanza
  as Don't install *anything* that the Debian folks created.
  Correct?

 Package: *
 Pin: release o=Debian
 Pin-Priority: -10

-- 
Bill Wohler [EMAIL PROTECTED]  http://www.newt.com/wohler/  GnuPG ID:610BD9AD
Maintainer of comp.mail.mh FAQ and mh-e. Vote Libertarian!
If you're passed on the right, you're in the wrong lane.

Apt preferences (was Re: apt question)

[Bill Wohler]

  I asked myself the questions: How do I add the occasional unstable
  package to my testing system in a better way than downloading debs
  and using dpkg to install them? How do I track packages in testing
  that I originally got out of unstable? Finally, and less often, how
  do I track a particular package in unstable?

  I searched the archives, discovered preferences, and read the
  apt-preferences man page. I came up with this:

Package: *
Pin: release a=testing
Pin-Priority: 600

Package: *
Pin: release a=unstable
Pin-Priority: 80

Package: netsaint
Pin: release a=unstable
Pin-Priority: 601

  I learned that I could install an unstable package by appending
  /unstable to the package name, like this:

apt-get install netsaint/unstable

  From then on, apt-get update/upgrade should do the Right Thing.
  Right? Does this configuration answer my questions above? 


  The apt-preferences man page is baffling. It definitely needs
  examples (like the one above). It needs better explanations. For
  example, Joey once included this preferences file:

 Package: *
 Pin: release a=testing
 Pin-Priority: 900
 
 Package: *
 Pin: release o=Debian
 Pin-Priority: -10

  Even after pouring over the apt-preferences man page a few times, I
  have no idea what is meant by the second stanza.

  Examples should be added to /usr/share/doc/apt as well.

-- 
Bill Wohler [EMAIL PROTECTED]  http://www.newt.com/wohler/  GnuPG ID:610BD9AD
Maintainer of comp.mail.mh FAQ and mh-e. Vote Libertarian!
If you're passed on the right, you're in the wrong lane.

Re: Apt preferences (was Re: apt question)

[Brian Nelson]

Bill Wohler [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

   Even after pouring over the apt-preferences man page a few times, I
   have no idea what is meant by the second stanza.
 
   Examples should be added to /usr/share/doc/apt as well.

http://bugs.debian.org/114417

-- 
Brian Nelson [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Apt preferences (was Re: apt question)

[Osamu Aoki]

On Thu, Oct 25, 2001 at 06:10:10PM -0700, Brian Nelson wrote:
 Bill Wohler [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
 
Even after pouring over the apt-preferences man page a few times, I
have no idea what is meant by the second stanza.
  
Examples should be added to /usr/share/doc/apt as well.
 
 http://bugs.debian.org/114417
 http://bugs.debian.org/115517

Also apt-get install apt-howto/unstable

-- 
~\^o^/~~~ ~\^.^/~~~ ~\^*^/~~~ ~\^_^/~~~ ~\^+^/~~~ ~\^:^/~~~ ~\^v^/~~~ 
+  Osamu Aoki [EMAIL PROTECTED], GnuPG-key: 1024D/D5DE453D  +
+  My debian quick-reference, http://www.aokiconsulting.com/quick/+

Re: yet another apt question

[Guy Geens]

 Joerg == Joerg Johannes [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

Joerg Hi List Where does apt store the packages.gz files it
Joerg downloaded when doing apt-get update? My idea is to copy them
Joerg to another computer (which has no internet access) for doing a
Joerg dist-upgrade.

Take a look at apt-move. I never used it myself, but it should help
you do what you want.

Good luck.

-- 
G. ``Iggy'' Geens - ICQ: #64109250
Home: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Work: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
WWW: http://users.pandora.be/guy.geens/
`I want quality, not quantity. But I want lots of it!'

yet another apt question

[Joerg Johannes]

Hi List

Where does apt store the packages.gz files it downloaded when doing
apt-get update?
My idea is to copy them to another computer (which has no internet
access) for doing a dist-upgrade. I think all I need is an up-to-date
list of available packages including their dependencies, and the new
packages in /var/cache/apt/archives. Is this as easy as I hope? If no,
how can I uprgade a totally off-network box?

thanks

joerg


-- 
Did you know that if you play a Windows 2000 cd backwards, you 
will hear the voice of Satan?

That's nothing!  If you play it forward, it'll install Windows 2000.

Re: yet another apt question

[Antonio Rodriguez]

use download only option for apt-get , debs are already compressed, then
transfer
- Original Message -
From: Joerg Johannes [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: debian-user debian-user@lists.debian.org
Sent: Monday, August 13, 2001 7:32 AM
Subject: yet another apt question


 Hi List

 Where does apt store the packages.gz files it downloaded when doing
 apt-get update?
 My idea is to copy them to another computer (which has no internet
 access) for doing a dist-upgrade. I think all I need is an up-to-date
 list of available packages including their dependencies, and the new
 packages in /var/cache/apt/archives. Is this as easy as I hope? If no,
 how can I uprgade a totally off-network box?

 thanks

 joerg


 --
 Did you know that if you play a Windows 2000 cd backwards, you
 will hear the voice of Satan?

 That's nothing!  If you play it forward, it'll install Windows 2000.


 --
 To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: yet another apt question

[Joerg Johannes]

Antonio Rodriguez wrote:
 
 use download only option for apt-get , debs are already compressed, then
 transfer

NO, you misunderstood my question. I know what to do with the debs, once
I have them downloaded. I want to know how to tell the offline-box which
debs to use without doing apt-get update (because it's impossible).

joerg

-- 
Did you know that if you play a Windows 2000 cd backwards, you 
will hear the voice of Satan?

That's nothing!  If you play it forward, it'll install Windows 2000.

Re: yet another apt question

[Andrea Vettorello]

On 13 Aug 2001 13:32:48 +0200, Joerg Johannes wrote:
 Hi List
 
 Where does apt store the packages.gz files it downloaded when doing
 apt-get update?
 My idea is to copy them to another computer (which has no internet
 access) for doing a dist-upgrade. I think all I need is an up-to-date
 list of available packages including their dependencies, and the new
 packages in /var/cache/apt/archives. Is this as easy as I hope? If no,
 how can I uprgade a totally off-network box?
 

In sid, apt store the info in /var/lib/apt/lists, don't remember for
potato... (something like /var/state/apt/lists, but i could be wrong)


Andrea

Re: yet another apt question

[David Z. Maze]

Joerg Johannes [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
JJ NO, you misunderstood my question. I know what to do with the debs, once
JJ I have them downloaded. I want to know how to tell the offline-box which
JJ debs to use without doing apt-get update (because it's
JJ impossible).

You can just copy the package files from one machine to the other and
install them using 'dpkg --install filename.deb'.

-- 
David Maze [EMAIL PROTECTED]  http://people.debian.org/~dmaze/
Theoretical politics is interesting.  Politicking should be illegal.
-- Abra Mitchell

Re: yet another apt question

[Joerg Johannes]

David Z. Maze wrote:
 
 Joerg Johannes [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
 JJ NO, you misunderstood my question. I know what to do with the debs, once
 JJ I have them downloaded. I want to know how to tell the offline-box which
 JJ debs to use without doing apt-get update (because it's
 JJ impossible).
 
 You can just copy the package files from one machine to the other and
 install them using 'dpkg --install filename.deb'.


This is ok for installing one or two packages, but it is near impossible
for a
dist-upgrade.

joerg

-- 
Did you know that if you play a Windows 2000 cd backwards, you 
will hear the voice of Satan?

That's nothing!  If you play it forward, it'll install Windows 2000.

Re: yet another apt question

[Willi Dyck]

On Mon, Aug 13, 2001 at 03:40:11PM +0200, Andrea Vettorello wrote:
 In sid, apt store the info in /var/lib/apt/lists, don't remember for
 potato... (something like /var/state/apt/lists, but i could be wrong)

Actually for potato they are in /var/state/apt/lists.
In woody and sid they are in /var/lib/apt/lists.
Regards, Willi

-- 
i am a sysadmin because i couldn't beat
a blind monkey in a coding contest.


pgpvF4bHtg773.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: apt question revisitted

[der.hans]

Am 03. Jul, 2001 schwäzte Paul Mackinney so:

 Disclaimer: Post from blatant newbie.

 I tried der.hans' advice to add the two lines to /etc/apt/sources.list for
 woody (these exactly match the woody page on www.debian.org, BTW)

  deb http://http.us.debian.org/debian testing main contrib non-free
  deb http://non-us.debian.org/debian-non-US testing/non-US main

 contrib non-free

 and then per his suggestion, did the following:

  Do an apt-get update, then an apt-get install apt...

 This seems to have failed. See below for what appeared in my terminal,
 suggestions as to how to proceed very much appreciated--I'd like to either
 revert to how things were before, or finish this installation without
 totally bonking the system.

 Side topic: My motivation for upgrading from potato is that I need to
 learn java, would prefer to do it on Linux. I'm having trouble installing
 a java SDK that supports the examples in O'Reilly's Nutshell book I'm

What version does the Nutshell book presume? Should be listed somewhere at
the front of the book.

 also having the usual trouble getting java applets to run on potato's
 version of Mozilla. I downloaded mozilla 0.9.2, but it won't run because
 it can't find the shared library: 'libc6++.so.u.think.u.can.run.linux'. I
 downloaded the Sun Java SDK, javac won't run either, basically says the
 same thing. I *think* I know that this error means that the program is
 looking for a symbolic link to the libc shared library, can someone
 confirm this and/or explain how to resolve these issues?

Have you tried the Blackdown JDK debs?

ftp://ftp.tux.org/pub/java/debian/dists/

Haven't used them myself, but they seemed to get good reviews on this list
over the last couple of weeks. I will probably be installing them for work
Thu instead of going with the tarball from Sun.

 Apt error output from terminal:

Comments below by the errors.

 dog:~# apt-get install apt
 Reading Package Lists... Done
 Building Dependency Tree... Done
 The following extra packages will be installed:
 binutils cpp cpp-2.95 g++ g++-2.95 gcc gcc-2.95 gobjc gobjc-2.95 libc6
 libc6-dev libdb2 libdb2-util libstdc++2.10-dev libstdc++2.10-glibc2.2
 locales
 The following NEW packages will be installed:
 cpp-2.95 g++-2.95 gcc-2.95 gobjc-2.95 libstdc++2.10-glibc2.2
 12 packages upgraded, 5 newly installed, 0 to remove and 313 not
 upgraded.
 Need to get 14.0MB of archives. After unpacking 3267kB will be used.
 Do you want to continue? [Y/n]
 Get:1 http://http.us.debian.org testing/main libdb2 2:2.7.7-8 [273kB]
 Get:2 http://http.us.debian.org testing/main libc6 2.2.3-5 [3206kB]
 Get:3 http://http.us.debian.org testing/main libstdc++2.10-glibc2.2
 1:2.95.4-0.010424 [126kB]
 Get:4 http://http.us.debian.org testing/main apt 0.5.3 [591kB]
 Get:5 http://http.us.debian.org testing/main binutils 2.11.90.0.7-2
 [1198kB]
 Get:6 http://http.us.debian.org testing/main cpp 1:2.95.3-7 [2526B]
 Get:7 http://http.us.debian.org testing/main cpp-2.95
 1:2.95.4-0.010424 [114kB]
 Get:8 http://http.us.debian.org testing/main g++ 1:2.95.3-7 [1256B]
 Get:9 http://http.us.debian.org testing/main g++-2.95
 1:2.95.4-0.010424 [1018kB]Get:10 http://http.us.debian.org
 testing/main gcc 1:2.95.3-7 [3276B]
 Get:11 http://http.us.debian.org testing/main gcc-2.95
 1:2.95.4-0.010424 [940kB]Get:12 http://http.us.debian.org testing/main
 libstdc++2.10-dev 1:2.95.4-0.010424 [299kB]
 Get:13 http://http.us.debian.org testing/main libc6-dev 2.2.3-5
 [2292kB]
 Get:14 http://http.us.debian.org testing/main locales 2.2.3-5 [2949kB]
 Get:15 http://http.us.debian.org testing/main gobjc 1:2.95.3-7 [1082B]
 Get:16 http://http.us.debian.org testing/main gobjc-2.95
 1:2.95.4-0.010424 [850kB]
 Get:17 http://http.us.debian.org testing/main libdb2-util 2:2.7.7-8
 [107kB]
 Fetched 14.0MB in 43s (320kB/s)
 (Reading database ... 41000 files and directories currently
 installed.)
 Preparing to replace libdb2-util 2:2.4.14-2.7.7.1.c (using
 .../libdb2-util_2%3a2.7.7-8_i386.deb) ...
 Unpacking replacement libdb2-util ...
 Preparing to replace libdb2 2:2.4.14-2.7.7.1.c (using
 .../libdb2_2%3a2.7.7-8_i386.deb) ...
 Unpacking replacement libdb2 ...
 Replacing files in old package libc6 ...
 Preparing to replace locales 2.1.3-18 (using
 .../locales_2.2.3-5_all.deb) ...
 Unpacking replacement locales ...
 Preparing to replace cpp 1:2.95.2-13 (using
 .../cpp_1%3a2.95.3-7_i386.deb) ...
 Unpacking replacement cpp ...
 Selecting previously deselected package cpp-2.95.
 Unpacking cpp-2.95 (from .../cpp-2.95_1%3a2.95.4-0.010424_i386.deb)
 ...
 Selecting previously deselected package gobjc-2.95.
 Unpacking gobjc-2.95 (from
 .../gobjc-2.95_1%3a2.95.4-0.010424_i386.deb) ...
 Preparing to replace gobjc 1:2.95.2-13 (using
 .../gobjc_1%3a2.95.3-7_i386.deb) ...
 Unpacking replacement gobjc ...
 Preparing to replace gcc 1:2.95.2-13 (using
 .../gcc_1%3a2.95.3-7_i386.deb) ...
 Removing old gcc doc directory.
 Unpacking replacement gcc ...
 Preparing to replace binutils 2.9.5.0.37-1 (using
 

Re: apt question revisitted

[der.hans]

Am 03. Jul, 2001 schwäzte D-Man so:

 I used 'dist-upgrade', not 'install apt', a couple weeks ago.  I got
 the same sort of errors.  I tried the '-f' (force) option (as suggested

Actually, -f is --fix-broken.

 by some program) and it worked.  I then killed it so I could go back to
 regular uprade mode (after libc and libstdc++ were upgraded) and had no
 real trouble, except that I occasionally got a Sub-process died error.  As
 suggested, run 'dpkg --reconfigure -a', then kill it because (of course)

That should be dpkg --configure -a.

These two commands seem to fix most of the installation issues I run into
when dist-upgrading.

 the configure will fail with only some packages installed.  Restart the
 dist-upgrade to continue where it left off before.  Note that I may have
 been lucky in all of this to not have any disatrous side-effects, and I
 probably got some error messages along the way that I solved, and now
 don't remember.o

Not luck, rather a very good system. Hopefully soon even the two minor fixes
you brought up above will be things of the past :).

ciao,

der.hans
-- 
# [EMAIL PROTECTED] home.pages.de/~lufthans/ www.DevelopOnline.com
# ... make it clear I support Free Software and not Open Source,
# and don't imply I agree that there is such a thing as a
# Linux operating system. - rms

apt-ssh / ssh-apt question

[Bostjan Muller]

Hi!

I think I have read about some ssh enabled apt some time ago on this list. I
have searched the mailing lsit archives, but could not find anything. If
someone knows of a way how to use apt with ssh I'd really be gratefull for the
information.

THX in advance!

Bostjan
-- 
 Boštjan Müller [NEONATUS], [EMAIL PROTECTED], http://surf.to/NEONATUS
  ICQ #:7506644, For my PGP key finger: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
   RSA id: 0x90178DBD, Powered by Debian GNU/Linux 2.2+.
 Cellular: +38641243189, Predjamska 4, 1000 Ljubljana
 Student of Slovenian veterinary faculty, University of Ljubljana.

apt question revisitted

[Paul Mackinney]

Disclaimer: Post from blatant newbie.

I tried der.hans' advice to add the two lines to /etc/apt/sources.list
for woody (these exactly match the woody page on www.debian.org, BTW)

 deb http://http.us.debian.org/debian testing main contrib non-free
 deb http://non-us.debian.org/debian-non-US testing/non-US main
contrib non-free

and then per his suggestion, did the following:

 Do an apt-get update, then an apt-get install apt...

This seems to have failed. See below for what appeared in my terminal,
suggestions as to how to proceed very much appreciated--I'd like to
either revert to how things were before, or finish this installation
without totally bonking the system.

Side topic: My motivation for upgrading from potato is that I need to
learn java, would prefer to do it on Linux. I'm having trouble
installing a java SDK that supports the examples in O'Reilly's
Nutshell book I'm also having the usual trouble getting java applets
to run on potato's version of Mozilla. I downloaded mozilla 0.9.2, but
it won't run because it can't find the shared library:
'libc6++.so.u.think.u.can.run.linux'. I downloaded the Sun Java SDK,
javac won't run either, basically says the same thing. I *think* I
know that this error means that the program is looking for a symbolic
link to the libc shared library, can someone confirm this and/or
explain how to resolve these issues?

Thanks,

Paul Mackinney
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Backup? MacDonald's is always hiring aren't they?

Apt error output from terminal:

dog:~# apt-get install apt
Reading Package Lists... Done
Building Dependency Tree... Done
The following extra packages will be installed:
binutils cpp cpp-2.95 g++ g++-2.95 gcc gcc-2.95 gobjc gobjc-2.95 libc6
libc6-dev libdb2 libdb2-util libstdc++2.10-dev libstdc++2.10-glibc2.2
locales
The following NEW packages will be installed:
cpp-2.95 g++-2.95 gcc-2.95 gobjc-2.95 libstdc++2.10-glibc2.2
12 packages upgraded, 5 newly installed, 0 to remove and 313 not
upgraded.
Need to get 14.0MB of archives. After unpacking 3267kB will be used.
Do you want to continue? [Y/n]
Get:1 http://http.us.debian.org testing/main libdb2 2:2.7.7-8 [273kB]
Get:2 http://http.us.debian.org testing/main libc6 2.2.3-5 [3206kB]
Get:3 http://http.us.debian.org testing/main libstdc++2.10-glibc2.2
1:2.95.4-0.010424 [126kB]
Get:4 http://http.us.debian.org testing/main apt 0.5.3 [591kB]
Get:5 http://http.us.debian.org testing/main binutils 2.11.90.0.7-2
[1198kB]
Get:6 http://http.us.debian.org testing/main cpp 1:2.95.3-7 [2526B]
Get:7 http://http.us.debian.org testing/main cpp-2.95
1:2.95.4-0.010424 [114kB]
Get:8 http://http.us.debian.org testing/main g++ 1:2.95.3-7 [1256B]
Get:9 http://http.us.debian.org testing/main g++-2.95
1:2.95.4-0.010424 [1018kB]Get:10 http://http.us.debian.org
testing/main gcc 1:2.95.3-7 [3276B]
Get:11 http://http.us.debian.org testing/main gcc-2.95
1:2.95.4-0.010424 [940kB]Get:12 http://http.us.debian.org testing/main
libstdc++2.10-dev 1:2.95.4-0.010424 [299kB]
Get:13 http://http.us.debian.org testing/main libc6-dev 2.2.3-5
[2292kB]
Get:14 http://http.us.debian.org testing/main locales 2.2.3-5 [2949kB]
Get:15 http://http.us.debian.org testing/main gobjc 1:2.95.3-7 [1082B]
Get:16 http://http.us.debian.org testing/main gobjc-2.95
1:2.95.4-0.010424 [850kB]
Get:17 http://http.us.debian.org testing/main libdb2-util 2:2.7.7-8
[107kB]
Fetched 14.0MB in 43s (320kB/s)
(Reading database ... 41000 files and directories currently
installed.)
Preparing to replace libdb2-util 2:2.4.14-2.7.7.1.c (using
.../libdb2-util_2%3a2.7.7-8_i386.deb) ...
Unpacking replacement libdb2-util ...
Preparing to replace libdb2 2:2.4.14-2.7.7.1.c (using
.../libdb2_2%3a2.7.7-8_i386.deb) ...
Unpacking replacement libdb2 ...
Replacing files in old package libc6 ...
Preparing to replace locales 2.1.3-18 (using
.../locales_2.2.3-5_all.deb) ...
Unpacking replacement locales ...
Preparing to replace cpp 1:2.95.2-13 (using
.../cpp_1%3a2.95.3-7_i386.deb) ...
Unpacking replacement cpp ...
Selecting previously deselected package cpp-2.95.
Unpacking cpp-2.95 (from .../cpp-2.95_1%3a2.95.4-0.010424_i386.deb)
...
Selecting previously deselected package gobjc-2.95.
Unpacking gobjc-2.95 (from
.../gobjc-2.95_1%3a2.95.4-0.010424_i386.deb) ...
Preparing to replace gobjc 1:2.95.2-13 (using
.../gobjc_1%3a2.95.3-7_i386.deb) ...
Unpacking replacement gobjc ...
Preparing to replace gcc 1:2.95.2-13 (using
.../gcc_1%3a2.95.3-7_i386.deb) ...
Removing old gcc doc directory.
Unpacking replacement gcc ...
Preparing to replace binutils 2.9.5.0.37-1 (using
.../binutils_2.11.90.0.7-2_i386.deb) ...
Unpacking replacement binutils ...
Selecting previously deselected package gcc-2.95.
Unpacking gcc-2.95 (from .../gcc-2.95_1%3a2.95.4-0.010424_i386.deb)
...
Preparing to replace g++ 1:2.95.2-13 (using
.../g++_1%3a2.95.3-7_i386.deb) ...
Unpacking replacement g++ ...
Selecting previously deselected package g++-2.95.
Unpacking g++-2.95 (from .../g++-2.95_1%3a2.95.4-0.010424_i386.deb)
...
Preparing to replace 

Re: apt question revisitted

[D-Man]

On Tue, Jul 03, 2001 at 02:54:02PM -0700, Paul Mackinney wrote:
| Disclaimer: Post from blatant newbie.
| 
| I tried der.hans' advice to add the two lines to /etc/apt/sources.list
| for woody (these exactly match the woody page on www.debian.org, BTW)

| Unpacking g++-2.95 (from .../g++-2.95_1%3a2.95.4-0.010424_i386.deb)
| ...
| Preparing to replace libstdc++2.10-dev 1:2.95.2-13 (using
| .../libstdc++2.10-dev_1%3a2.95.4-0.010424_i386.deb) ...
| perl: /lib/libc.so.6: version `GLIBC_2.2' not found (required by
| /lib/libdb.so.3)
| dpkg: warning - old pre-removal script returned error exit status 1
| dpkg - trying script from the new package instead ...
| perl: /lib/libc.so.6: version `GLIBC_2.2' not found (required by
| /lib/libdb.so.3)
| dpkg: error processing
| /var/cache/apt/archives/libstdc++2.10-dev_1%3a2.95.4-0.010424_i386.deb
| (--unpack):
| subprocess new pre-removal script returned error exit status 1
| dpkg: regarding .../libc6-dev_2.2.3-5_i386.deb containing libc6-dev:
| libc6-dev conflicts with libstdc++2.10-dev ( 1:2.95.2-15)
| libstdc++2.10-dev (version 1:2.95.2-13) is installed.
| dpkg: error processing
| /var/cache/apt/archives/libc6-dev_2.2.3-5_i386.deb (--unpack):
| conflicting packages - not installing libc6-dev
| Preparing to replace libc6 2.1.3-18 (using .../libc6_2.2.3-5_i386.deb)
| ...
| Unpacking replacement libc6 ...
| Replacing files in old package ldso ...
| Replacing files in old package netbase ...
| Errors were encountered while processing:
| /var/cache/apt/archives/libstdc++2.10-dev_1%3a2.95.4-0.010424_i386.deb
| /var/cache/apt/archives/libc6-dev_2.2.3-5_i386.deb
| E: Sub-process /usr/bin/dpkg returned an error code (1)
| dog:~#

I used 'dist-upgrade', not 'install apt', a couple weeks ago.  I got
the same sort of errors.  I tried the '-f' (force) option (as
suggested by some program) and it worked.  I then killed it so I could
go back to regular uprade mode (after libc and libstdc++ were
upgraded) and had no real trouble, except that I occasionally got a
Sub-process died error.  As suggested, run 'dpkg --reconfigure -a',
then kill it because (of course) the configure will fail with only
some packages installed.  Restart the dist-upgrade to continue where
it left off before.  Note that I may have been lucky in all of this to
not have any disatrous side-effects, and I probably got some error
messages along the way that I solved, and now don't remember.o

HTH,
-D

Re: apt question

[Ben Harvey]

On Thu, Jun 14, 2001 at 05:37:11PM -0500, will trillich wrote:
 i stick with potato. it worked yesterday, it'll still work
 tomorrow. i may WANT something fancy that's only in woody, but i
 can make do with potato just fine. and intelligent contributors
 keep backporting other gizmos to potato anyway--

I remember hearing something about mixing potato  woody in sources.list so 
that apt wont use the unstable version unless you explicitly tell it to.

now that I want to do just that I can't find the relevant docs/archived mail
It might have had something to do with epochs or wierdness in apt.conf
- does anyone know what I am talking about??

TIA
Ben

-- 

Re: apt question

[der.hans]

Am 15. Jun, 2001 schwäzte Ben Harvey so:

 I remember hearing something about mixing potato  woody in sources.list so 
 that apt wont use the unstable version unless you explicitly tell it to.
 
 now that I want to do just that I can't find the relevant docs/archived mail
 It might have had something to do with epochs or wierdness in apt.conf
 - does anyone know what I am talking about??

Look at my email in this thread from yesterday.

ciao,

der.hans
-- 
# [EMAIL PROTECTED] home.pages.de/~lufthans/ www.DevelopOnline.com
# ... make it clear I support Free Software and not Open Source,
# and don't imply I agree that there is such a thing as a
# Linux operating system. - rms

apt question

[pReJkEr]

Ello

  i've installed debian on my comp for the first time
  and when i was installing it (base-config) from an ftp site
  (ftp.pl.debian.org) apt downloads very old packages ie. xfree-3.3.6
  gnome-1.0 and so on can someone tell me what i have to write to
  sources.list to make apt to download new packages ie. xfree86-4.1.0
  gnome-1.4 kde-2.1..

  thx ;]

...:: [ pReJkEr ] ::...
   ...:: [ [EMAIL PROTECTED] ] ::...
...:: [ http://www.aaocg.prv.pl ] ::...

Re: apt question

[Andrew Dixon]

HI
pReJkEr wrote:
Ello
 i've installed debian on my comp for the first time
 and when i was installing it (base-config) from an ftp site
 (ftp.pl.debian.org) apt downloads very old packages ie. xfree-3.3.6
 gnome-1.0 and so on can someone tell me what i have to write
to
 sources.list to make apt to download new packages ie. xfree86-4.1.0
 gnome-1.4 kde-2.1..
I assume your running stable. If this is the case the simplest way
to get all of the latest and greatest packages would be to upgrade to testing
or unstable. To do this you change your sources.list from:
deb http://http.us.debian.org/debian stable main contrib non-free
#
^
deb http://non-us.debian.org/debian-non-US stable/non-US main contrib
non-free
#
^
deb http://security.debian.org stable/updates main contrib non-free
#
^
to:
deb http://http.us.debian.org/debian testing main contrib non-free
#
^^
deb http://non-us.debian.org/debian-non-US testing/non-US main contrib
non-free
#
^^
deb http://security.debian.org stable/updates main contrib non-free
#
^
Note that you should keep security set to stable (why would you want
unstable security fixes ; )
then just run:

#apt-get update
#apt-get dist-upgrade
or you could just install the new packages and then change your sources.list
back to stable. There are other cooler ways to install packages from
testing even if your running stable but Idon't know how to do it.
Anyone else have an idea?
HTH,
Andy

Re: apt question

[stevencooper]

On Thu, Jun 14, 2001 at 10:15:14AM -0500, Andrew Dixon decreed:
i've installed debian on my comp for the first time
and when i was installing it (base-config) from an ftp site
(ftp.pl.debian.org) apt downloads very old packages ie. xfree-3.3.6
gnome-1.0 and so on can someone tell me what i have to write to
sources.list to make apt to download new packages ie. xfree86-4.1.0
gnome-1.4 kde-2.1..
 
 I assume your running stable.  If this is the case the simplest way to get all
 of the latest and greatest packages would be to upgrade to testing or 
 unstable.
 To do this you change your sources.list from:
...
 
 #apt-get update
 #apt-get dist-upgrade
 
 or you could just install the new packages and then change your sources.list
 back to stable.  There are other cooler ways to install packages from testing
 even if your running stable but I don't know how to do it.  Anyone else have 
 an
 idea?

I'm not an expert.  But I've had personal/painful experience with
blithely upgrading or mixing and matching stable, testing and
unstable.  The following suggestions are merely my opinion.

A couple of things to think about.

1) Assume you can't go back.  There are tricks that may help, but they
probably won't work.  Once you move up to a more aggressive package
set you are most likely stuck.

2) Testing and unstable have definite risks.  Assume you will suffer
broken package dependencies, etc.  For the most part you can overcome
these problems.  It takes work, knowledge and a little luck.

The best advice I've received is to live in stable, but configure
sources.list to get source packages from unstable.  Then any new
packages not in the stable distribution can be downloaded as source
and built into your .deb package.  This is much safer than playing
with unstable or testing binaries on a stable system.

I hope more experienced debian gurus double-check my advice for
factual errors.  However there's no doubt that pausing and pondering
before leaping up to testing or stable would be wise.

Cheers,
Steve Cooper

Re: apt question

[der.hans]

Am 14. Jun, 2001 schwäzte pReJkEr so:

   i've installed debian on my comp for the first time
   and when i was installing it (base-config) from an ftp site
   (ftp.pl.debian.org) apt downloads very old packages ie. xfree-3.3.6
   gnome-1.0 and so on can someone tell me what i have to write to
   sources.list to make apt to download new packages ie. xfree86-4.1.0
   gnome-1.4 kde-2.1..

First off: a reminder that debian comes without warranty. Same with my
advice :). testing is not necessarily a stable archive. I, however, have had
very few problems and it's worked quite well for me :).

Next apt-get update and apt-get -u dist-upgrade to make sure you're
current from stable.

Then add testing to /etc/apt/sources.list.

deb http://http.us.debian.org/debian testing main contrib non-free
deb http://non-us.debian.org/debian-non-US testing/non-US main contrib non-free

Change http.us.debian.org to a more appropriate mirror if you're not in the
.us.

Keep the entries for stable and security.

Do an apt-get update, then an apt-get install apt. That will get you the
new apt, which can take advantage of a really cool feature.

Create /etc/apt/preferences with the following two stanzas in it:

Package: *
Pin: release a=stable
Pin-Priority: 800

Package: *
Pin: release a=testing
Pin-Priority: 90

Now do an apt-get -u dist-upgrade. That should come up with nothing new to
add.

Now you can apt-get install task-x-window-system/testing. Same syntax
works for the other things you want updated. The nice thing about using
preferences is that this will get things from stable that meet the
requirements.

If you want to just move to testing, then change the Pin-Priority for
testing to be 900 and do a dist-upgrade.

ciao,

der.hans
-- 
# [EMAIL PROTECTED] home.pages.de/~lufthans/ www.DevelopOnline.com
#  ... the social skills of a cow on acid. - der.hans

Re: apt question

[will trillich]

On Thu, Jun 14, 2001 at 08:51:47PM +0200, pReJkEr wrote:
 Ello
 
   i've installed debian on my comp for the first time
   and when i was installing it (base-config) from an ftp site
   (ftp.pl.debian.org) apt downloads very old packages ie. xfree-3.3.6
   gnome-1.0 and so on can someone tell me what i have to write to
   sources.list to make apt to download new packages ie. xfree86-4.1.0
   gnome-1.4 kde-2.1..

maybe you have an older CD set? the CDs might have an
older instance (you may even be running SLINK, heavens)...

for safety's sake, stick with potato for a while --
do apt-setup to get the sources.list the way you like it, then
apt-get update followed by apt-get upgrade.

if you have trouble with that, try changing sources.list to

deb http://http.us.debian.org/debian stable main contrib non-free
deb http://non-us.debian.org/debian-non-US stable/non-US main contrib 
non-free

deb http://security.debian.org/debian-security stable/updates main 
contrib non-free
deb http://security.debian.org/debian-non-US stable/non-US main contrib 
non-free
deb http://security.debian.org stable/updates main contrib non-free

and then

apt-get update
apt-get upgrade

remember -- there's tradeoffs between latest untested bug farm
and thoroughly beaten and tested and cleaned up.

i stick with potato. it worked yesterday, it'll still work
tomorrow. i may WANT something fancy that's only in woody, but i
can make do with potato just fine. and intelligent contributors
keep backporting other gizmos to potato anyway--

# postgresql 7.* -- for potato
deb http://www.samfundet.no/~tfheen/debian potato main

# potato webmin
deb http://www.braincells.com/pub/debian/Local potato/

keep your eyes open.  and read my intro at

http://newbieDoc.sourceForge.net/system/apt-get-intro.html

-- 
DEBIAN NEWBIE TIP #36 from Sean Quinlan [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
:
Looking to CHANGE THE DEFAULT LS COLORS? It's simple: first,
dircolors -p ~/.dircolors
and then edit the results to suit your tastes; finally, insert
eval `dircolors -b ~/.dircolors`
in your ~/.bashrc. Next time you log in (or source ~/.bashrc)
your new colors will take effect.

Also see http://newbieDoc.sourceForge.net/ ...

Re: apt question

[Joey Hess]

Jitse Niesen wrote:
 You can add the following line to /etc/apt/apt.conf:
 
APT::Default-Release testing;

Hm, I tried that with poor results, the following in
/etc/apt/preferences works much better for me:

Package: *
Pin: release a=testing
Pin-Priority: 900

Package: *
Pin: release o=Debian
Pin-Priority: -10

-- 
see shy jo

Re: apt question

[Jitse Niesen]

On Sat, 24 Mar 2001, Radu Muschevici wrote:

 is it posible to have two distro lines in /etc/apt/sources.list
 like this:
 
 deb http://ftp.de.debian.org/debian/ testing main non-free contrib
 deb http://ftp.de.debian.org/debian/ unstable main non-free contrib
 
 and prevent apt from taking every package from unstable since it
 has the newer version.
 [...]

You can add the following line to /etc/apt/apt.conf:

   APT::Default-Release testing;

This corresponds to the -t option of apt-get. According to apt-get's
manual page:

   This  option controls the default input to the pol-
   icy engine, it creates a default  pin  at  priority
   990 using the specified release string.

I couldn't find further documentation about this 'policy engine', but it
worked for me.

Jitse Niesen

Re: apt question

[Radu Muschevici]

On Sun, 25 Mar, 2001 at 19:37:04 +0100, Jitse Niesen wrote:
 On Sat, 24 Mar 2001, Radu Muschevici wrote:
 
  is it posible to have two distro lines in /etc/apt/sources.list
  like this:
  
  deb http://ftp.de.debian.org/debian/ testing main non-free contrib
  deb http://ftp.de.debian.org/debian/ unstable main non-free contrib
  
  and prevent apt from taking every package from unstable since it
  has the newer version.
  [...]
 
 You can add the following line to /etc/apt/apt.conf:
 
APT::Default-Release testing;
 
 This corresponds to the -t option of apt-get. According to apt-get's
 manual page:
 
This  option controls the default input to the pol-
icy engine, it creates a default  pin  at  priority
990 using the specified release string.
 
 I couldn't find further documentation about this 'policy engine', but it
 worked for me.
that's what I needed! Thanks.

Radu

Re: apt question

[timohart]

 deb http://ftp.de.debian.org/debian/ testing main non-free contrib
 deb http://ftp.de.debian.org/debian/ unstable main non-free contrib

Entries like this are not wise, because you will get only the newest
packages in the list, using select funktion of dselect.

 I want to run testing and only manually pick certain packages from
 unstable, like kde packages by entering something like:

If you only want to get kde packages you can put

deb http://kde.tdyc.com potato main crypto optional

into your sources.list to get the newest packages. If you like to use a more
stable kde then look at kde.org or kde.de (greman) for ftp mirrors. I use

deb
ftp://sunsite.informatik.rwth-aachen.de/pub/Linux/kde/stable/2.1/distributio
n/deb potato main

and had found no bugs of this 2.1-final since now.

Cu,

Timo

Re: apt question

[Radu Muschevici]

On Sat, 24 Mar, 2001 at 09:58:28 +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
  deb http://ftp.de.debian.org/debian/ testing main non-free contrib
  deb http://ftp.de.debian.org/debian/ unstable main non-free contrib
 
 Entries like this are not wise, because you will get only the newest
 packages in the list, using select funktion of dselect.
 
  I want to run testing and only manually pick certain packages from
  unstable, like kde packages by entering something like:
 
 If you only want to get kde packages you can put
I have potato packages right now, but i want those from unstable
(for font anti-aliasing mainly)

 
 deb http://kde.tdyc.com potato main crypto optional
 
 into your sources.list to get the newest packages. If you like to use a more
 stable kde then look at kde.org or kde.de (greman) for ftp mirrors. I use
 
 deb
 ftp://sunsite.informatik.rwth-aachen.de/pub/Linux/kde/stable/2.1/distributio
 n/deb potato main
 
 and had found no bugs of this 2.1-final since now.
i do _not_ want the kde packages for potato, i want the unstable ones. 
Potato KDE packages in combination with testing are unsupported
and besides that, font AA isn't enabled in the potato packages.

Radu

Re: apt question

[Karsten M. Self]

on Sat, Mar 24, 2001 at 03:47:47AM +0100, Radu Muschevici ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) 
wrote:
 is it posible to have two distro lines in /etc/apt/sources.list
 like this:
 
 deb http://ftp.de.debian.org/debian/ testing main non-free contrib
 deb http://ftp.de.debian.org/debian/ unstable main non-free contrib
 
 and prevent apt from taking every package from unstable since it
 has the newer version.
 
 I want to run testing and only manually pick certain packages from 
 unstable, like kde packages by entering something like:
 
 apt-get install kdebase/unstable
 
 how is this possible?

Generally it's not a good idea to mix and match between different Debian
release versions.  You *can* do this, but results vary, and you'll
almost always have issues in dependencies for downstream updates.

Better IMO to decide whether or not you want the overall features of the
stable, unstable, or testing paths, and stick to that.  Note that
nominally, testing is unstable minus ten days and bugs.

Alternatives include building latest-release packages from sources,
downloading directly from the maintainer, or packaging them yourself
into local debs.

There are command-line options to apt-get to temporarily select another
archive source if you so chose.

-- 
Karsten M. Self kmself@ix.netcom.comhttp://kmself.home.netcom.com/
 What part of Gestalt don't you understand?   There is no K5 cabal
  http://gestalt-system.sourceforge.net/ http://www.kuro5hin.org


pgp32XGbNWNVI.pgp
Description: PGP signature

apt question

[Radu Muschevici]

is it posible to have two distro lines in /etc/apt/sources.list
like this:

deb http://ftp.de.debian.org/debian/ testing main non-free contrib
deb http://ftp.de.debian.org/debian/ unstable main non-free contrib

and prevent apt from taking every package from unstable since it
has the newer version.

I want to run testing and only manually pick certain packages from 
unstable, like kde packages by entering something like:

apt-get install kdebase/unstable


how ist this possible?

thanks
Radu

Re: apt question

[fheitka]

In [EMAIL PROTECTED], on 03/05/01 
   at 12:52 PM, Osamu Aoki [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:


Just package your private package with higher version number and install
over working Debian is safer.  That is the right way.

Maybe I could make a simple deb package of my sources.  How hard is it to
do that?  Is there a link to some good docs?

Fred

Re: apt question

[Osamu Aoki]

Read packaging-manual and debian-policy.  I aint no expert.

 Maybe I could make a simple deb package of my sources.  How hard is it to
 do that?  Is there a link to some good docs?

-- 
+  Osamu Aoki [EMAIL PROTECTED], GnuPG-key: 1024D/D5DE453D  +
+   Fingerprint: 814E BD64 3288 40E7 E88E  3D92 C3F8 EA94 D5DE 453D   +
+   http://www.aokiconsulting.com/pc/  Cupertino, CA USA  +

Re: apt question

[Shaul Karl]

 In [EMAIL PROTECTED], on 03/05/01 
at 12:52 PM, Osamu Aoki [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
 
 
 Just package your private package with higher version number and install
 over working Debian is safer.  That is the right way.
 
 Maybe I could make a simple deb package of my sources.  How hard is it to
 do that?  


Depending on the complexity of the package. IMHO making a deb is not that 
hard, but it requires some time. Making a good, policy correct deb is harder. 
You can get help from [EMAIL PROTECTED]


 Is there a link to some good docs?
 


A good introductory level doc is www.debian.org/doc/maint-guide. The same doc 
is also available as a deb.


 Fred
 
 
 -- 
 To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
 with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 

-- 

Shaul Karl [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: apt question

[fheitka]

In [EMAIL PROTECTED], on 03/04/01 
   at 08:16 PM, Osamu Aoki [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:

I am sure you have enough space on HD (like swap).

Just do not overwrite current system.  Even if you try to hold them with
dselect, you have broken dependency.

Yeah.  Is there a way to get into the dependency map or database and
simply tell the package manager that these programs are already installed
and configured?

My question is really quite simple.  If we make an assumption that I know
what I'm doing (I know, a really BIG assumption :)), then I manually tell
the package manager that the base system (or whatever) is installed
perfectly; no need to reinstall.

I guess I need to take a look at the developer info and source code to see
if this can be done.

Gradual migration with dual boot is my suggestion.  Always maintain
working system.  Be safe than sorry.

I learned that years ago.  Before that the Slackware boot, root, and
rescue disks saved my arse many times.

Good luck.  Osamu

Thanks!

Fred

apt question

[F. Heitkamp]

I have a mostly working Linux setup that I have
maintained and upgraded over the years using
sources I've compiled and installed.

I want to use apt so that I can test and checkout
various applications and can remove them easily
if I no longer need, or don't like them.

How can I tell apt/dselect not to mess with the
base system?

What would really be nice is a gui program that
you could just check off the packages that you
don't want touched or upgraded.  I know that 
probably doesn't exist, but just being able to
do it manually would be nice too.

Also is there a option for dpkg that just lets
you test a package?  I sometimes download .debs
and would like to know if they downloaded OK.

-- 
Fred

Re: apt question

[Osamu Aoki]

Hi,

Mixing packaging system is considered bad practice.  I think it is best
not to do.  Alternative is dual boot Linux if it is not dedicated
production server. (If serious server, just set up another backup
machine)

Install debian and transfer data (mount partition or NFS) to migrate.
Debian without GUITEXDOC can be smaller than 200MB.  

I actually used swappable IDE to migrate from RH to Debian.  This way,
no way to screw up original working system.

OSAMU

On Sun, Mar 04, 2001 at 12:14:46PM -0500, F. Heitkamp wrote:
 I have a mostly working Linux setup that I have maintained and
 upgraded over the years using sources I've compiled and installed.
 
 I want to use apt so that I can test and checkout various applications
 and can remove them easily if I no longer need, or don't like them.
 
 How can I tell apt/dselect not to mess with the base system?


-- 
+  Osamu Aoki [EMAIL PROTECTED], GnuPG-key: 1024D/D5DE453D  +
+   Fingerprint: 814E BD64 3288 40E7 E88E  3D92 C3F8 EA94 D5DE 453D   +
+   http://www.aokiconsulting.com/pc/  Cupertino, CA USA  +

Re: apt question

[Shaul Karl]

 I have a mostly working Linux setup that I have
 maintained and upgraded over the years using
 sources I've compiled and installed.
 
 I want to use apt so that I can test and checkout
 various applications and can remove them easily
 if I no longer need, or don't like them.
 
 How can I tell apt/dselect not to mess with the
 base system?
 


Perhaps by telling dselect, capt or dpkg to put some packages on hold?


 What would really be nice is a gui program that
 you could just check off the packages that you
 don't want touched or upgraded.  I know that 
 probably doesn't exist, but just being able to
 do it manually would be nice too.
 


Although dselect or capt might not be considered GUI it can put packages on 
hold quite easily.
There is also the command line option with dpkg. There was a discussion today 
on debian-devel mailing list how to do it from the command line.


 Also is there a option for dpkg that just lets
 you test a package?  I sometimes download .debs
 and would like to know if they downloaded OK.
 


I never did it and I might be wrong here but it seems to me this can be 
achieved by computing the MD5SUM of the downloaded package and comparing it to 
the number that is published by the package should do it.


 -- 
 Fred
 
 
 -- 
 To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
 with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 

-- 

Shaul Karl [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: apt question

[John Galt]

On Sun, 4 Mar 2001, F. Heitkamp wrote:

I have a mostly working Linux setup that I have
maintained and upgraded over the years using
sources I've compiled and installed.

I want to use apt so that I can test and checkout
various applications and can remove them easily
if I no longer need, or don't like them.

How can I tell apt/dselect not to mess with the
base system?

echo base-config hold|dpkg --set-selections

What would really be nice is a gui program that
you could just check off the packages that you
don't want touched or upgraded.  I know that
probably doesn't exist, but just being able to
do it manually would be nice too.

Also is there a option for dpkg that just lets
you test a package?  I sometimes download .debs
and would like to know if they downloaded OK.

dpkg --no-act



-- 
Artificial intelligence is no match for natural stupidity.

Who is John Galt?  [EMAIL PROTECTED], that's who!

Re: apt question

[Osamu Aoki]

I may have misunderstood original posting but...

Enen if original poster started with one of Debian, he seems have
installled binary programs without debian package. (If he started
with RH or Slack, things are worse.)

If these programs are needed and can not be replaced by Debian ones, my
best bet is to make private package with higher version number and
install it to the clean system with dpkg -i,  I think.  Just like
kernel.

Data can be transfered. (All home directories and /etc/passwd etc.)

And use dselect to hold these packages.  (Oh also make sure to remove
conflicting packages.  You may have to provide special package
information not to break dependancy.)

Osamu

On Sun, Mar 04, 2001 at 02:04:55PM -0800, Osamu Aoki wrote:
 Hi,
 
 Mixing packaging system is considered bad practice.  I think it is best
 not to do.  Alternative is dual boot Linux if it is not dedicated
 production server. (If serious server, just set up another backup
 machine)
 
 Install debian and transfer data (mount partition or NFS) to migrate.
 Debian without GUITEXDOC can be smaller than 200MB.  
 
 I actually used swappable IDE to migrate from RH to Debian.  This way,
 no way to screw up original working system.
 
 OSAMU
 
 On Sun, Mar 04, 2001 at 12:14:46PM -0500, F. Heitkamp wrote:
  I have a mostly working Linux setup that I have maintained and
  upgraded over the years using sources I've compiled and installed.
  
  I want to use apt so that I can test and checkout various applications
  and can remove them easily if I no longer need, or don't like them.
  
  How can I tell apt/dselect not to mess with the base system?
 
 
 -- 
 +  Osamu Aoki [EMAIL PROTECTED], GnuPG-key: 1024D/D5DE453D  +
 +   Fingerprint: 814E BD64 3288 40E7 E88E  3D92 C3F8 EA94 D5DE 453D   +
 +   http://www.aokiconsulting.com/pc/  Cupertino, CA USA  +
 
 
 -- 
 To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
 with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 
 
 

-- 
+  Osamu Aoki [EMAIL PROTECTED], GnuPG-key: 1024D/D5DE453D  +
+   Fingerprint: 814E BD64 3288 40E7 E88E  3D92 C3F8 EA94 D5DE 453D   +
+   http://www.aokiconsulting.com/pc/  Cupertino, CA USA  +

Re: apt question

[fheitka]

In [EMAIL PROTECTED], on 03/04/01 
   at 07:14 PM, Osamu Aoki [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:

I may have misunderstood original posting but...

Enen if original poster started with one of Debian, he seems have
installled binary programs without debian package. (If he started with RH
or Slack, things are worse.)

It was Slackware eons ago.  I've converted it to be more like a Debian
system.  I'm using a Debian or SysV style init setup.

I am new to Debian.  I have a Debian setup on another partition I've be
playing with.

If these programs are needed and can not be replaced by Debian ones, my
best bet is to make private package with higher version number and
install it to the clean system with dpkg -i,  I think.  Just like kernel.

What I don't want to happen is to have apt decide to install the base
system, because right now it thinks there is no base system installed.

I understand that, normally one would want the packaging system to have
complete control of the system in order to avoid mismatched versions etc.,
but it seems there could be cases where one might  want to override the
packaging system decisions

Fred

Re: apt question

[Osamu Aoki]

I am sure you have enough space on HD (like swap).

Just do not overwrite current system.  Even if you try to hold them with
dselect, you have broken dependency.

You really need to install new base system.  (anything less will get you
into trouble.)

1.  Make space somewhere on HD.  (move files and unmount partition)
2.  Install minimum debian potato to new disk partition.
3.  When invoking dselect, using _ to exclude EMACS, nvi and TEX.
Or anything looks big but you do not need to start.
(Nothing personal.  Just too big for initial root)
4.  Mount existing other partitions and get passwd etc. transfered.
5.  Add needed programs.  Such as vim and mc.
6.  mount /home
  

Gradual migration with dual boot is my suggestion.  Always maintain
working system.  Be safe than sorry.

Slack and debian uses different uids.  Just make consistent.  I heard
debian can use same uid range as slack.

Good luck.  Osamu

 Even if original poster started with one of Debian, he seems have
 installed binary programs without debian package. (If he started with RH
 or Slack, things are worse.)
 
 It was Slackware eons ago.  I've converted it to be more like a Debian
 system.  I'm using a Debian or SysV style init setup.
 
 I am new to Debian.  I have a Debian setup on another partition I've be
 playing with.
 
 If these programs are needed and can not be replaced by Debian ones, my
 best bet is to make private package with higher version number and
 install it to the clean system with dpkg -i,  I think.  Just like kernel.
 
 What I don't want to happen is to have apt decide to install the base
 system, because right now it thinks there is no base system installed.
 
 I understand that, normally one would want the packaging system to have
 complete control of the system in order to avoid mismatched versions etc.,
 but it seems there could be cases where one might  want to override the
 packaging system decisions
 
 Fred
-- 
+  Osamu Aoki [EMAIL PROTECTED], GnuPG-key: 1024D/D5DE453D  +
+   Fingerprint: 814E BD64 3288 40E7 E88E  3D92 C3F8 EA94 D5DE 453D   +
+   http://www.aokiconsulting.com/pc/  Cupertino, CA USA  +