Re: Update on my update problem with gnome system.

[Kenneth Parker]

> > Wow!  I said "bad things" about Ubuntu regarding this topic but, just
> > today, experienced the same kind of thing, with Debian Stretch, regarding
> > the vlc "uber Package".  Seems it's replacing libvlccore8 with
> libvlccore9,
> > along with several other replacements!  So Debian also uses this
> technique
> > (dist-upgrade) for, other than "Upgrading the Distribution".
> >
> > Sorry about that, Ubuntu.  :-)
> >
> > Kenneth Parker
>
> Your criticism of Debian is unjustified.   apt-get dist-upgrade   is
> required to upgrade libvlccore8 to libvlccore9 because, of course, the
> latter is a different package.
>

Sorry abut that.  I guess it's mainly a Teaching Moment for me.  With
Ubuntu, every Kernel Upgrade was handled this way, which had prompted my
prior comment, criticizing Ubuntu.

libvlccore8 is based on VLC version 2 and libvlccore9 is based on VLC 3.
> VLC is susceptible to DSA-4203 (CVE-2017-17670), so VLC 3 has been fixed
> in 3.0.2. As VLC 2.x will not get fixed, stretch had no alternative
> but to move from version 2 to 3.
>

And, of course, the Version Upgrade is for a very good reason. (The
vulnerability description is fascinating!)

Cheers,
> David.
>

Thanks for your patience.

Kenneth Parker

Re: Update on my update problem with gnome system.

[David Wright]

On Sun 03 Jun 2018 at 20:05:39 (-0400), Kenneth Parker wrote:
> On Fri, May 25, 2018 at 10:02 PM, Kenneth Parker  wrote:
> 
> >
> >
> >>
> >> >dist-upgrade
> >> >dist-upgrade in addition to performing the function of
> >> upgrade, also intelligently
> >> >handles changing dependencies with new versions of packages;
> >> apt-get has a "smart"
> >> >conflict resolution system, and it will attempt to upgrade
> >> the most important packages
> >> >at the expense of less important ones if necessary. The
> >> dist-upgrade command may
> >> >therefore remove some packages. The /etc/apt/sources.list
> >> file contains a list of
> >> >locations from which to retrieve desired package files. See
> >> also apt_preferences(5)
> >> >for a mechanism for overriding the general settings for
> >> individual packages.
> >>
> >> Warning:  Ubuntu ("close enough" to Debian to confuse me, multiple years)
> > regularly requires dist-upgrade to do their frequent Kernel Upgrades,
> > because they change Version Numbers on, among other things, the vmlinuz
> > file.  So, when I do "apt-get upgrade" on the remaining Ubuntu Laptop, I
> > regularly see things like,
> >
> > 
> 
> Wow!  I said "bad things" about Ubuntu regarding this topic but, just
> today, experienced the same kind of thing, with Debian Stretch, regarding
> the vlc "uber Package".  Seems it's replacing libvlccore8 with libvlccore9,
> along with several other replacements!  So Debian also uses this technique
> (dist-upgrade) for, other than "Upgrading the Distribution".
> 
> Sorry about that, Ubuntu.  :-)
> 
> Kenneth Parker

Your criticism of Debian is unjustified.   apt-get dist-upgrade   is
required to upgrade libvlccore8 to libvlccore9 because, of course, the
latter is a different package.

libvlccore8 is based on VLC version 2 and libvlccore9 is based on VLC 3.
VLC is susceptible to DSA-4203 (CVE-2017-17670), so VLC 3 has been fixed
in 3.0.2. As VLC 2.x will not get fixed, stretch had no alternative
but to move from version 2 to 3.

Cheers,
David.

Re: Update on my update problem with gnome system.

[Kenneth Parker]

On Fri, May 25, 2018 at 10:02 PM, Kenneth Parker  wrote:

>
>
>>
>> >dist-upgrade
>> >dist-upgrade in addition to performing the function of
>> upgrade, also intelligently
>> >handles changing dependencies with new versions of packages;
>> apt-get has a "smart"
>> >conflict resolution system, and it will attempt to upgrade
>> the most important packages
>> >at the expense of less important ones if necessary. The
>> dist-upgrade command may
>> >therefore remove some packages. The /etc/apt/sources.list
>> file contains a list of
>> >locations from which to retrieve desired package files. See
>> also apt_preferences(5)
>> >for a mechanism for overriding the general settings for
>> individual packages.
>>
>> Warning:  Ubuntu ("close enough" to Debian to confuse me, multiple years)
> regularly requires dist-upgrade to do their frequent Kernel Upgrades,
> because they change Version Numbers on, among other things, the vmlinuz
> file.  So, when I do "apt-get upgrade" on the remaining Ubuntu Laptop, I
> regularly see things like,
>
> 

Wow!  I said "bad things" about Ubuntu regarding this topic but, just
today, experienced the same kind of thing, with Debian Stretch, regarding
the vlc "uber Package".  Seems it's replacing libvlccore8 with libvlccore9,
along with several other replacements!  So Debian also uses this technique
(dist-upgrade) for, other than "Upgrading the Distribution".

Sorry about that, Ubuntu.  :-)

Kenneth Parker

Re: Update on my update problem with gnome system.

[rhkramer]

On Saturday, May 26, 2018 02:08:59 PM Pétùr wrote:
> I don't use aptitude. I use only apt and apt-get but I believe apt is
> just a shortcut for apt-get. `apt update` is equivalent for me to
> `apt-get update` and `apt dist-upgrade` to `apt-get dist-upgrade`
> (correct me if I am wrong).

   * [[https://itsfoss.com/apt-vs-apt-get-difference/][Difference Between 
apt and apt-get Explained]]

> 
> My question was if apt (or apt-get) dist-upgrade was equivalent of apt
> (or apt-get) full-upgrade?

   * [[https://itsfoss.com/apt-vs-apt-get-difference/][Difference Between 
apt and apt-get Explained]]

Re: Update on my update problem with gnome system.

[Dan Norton]

On Wed, 30 May 2018 18:53:54 +0100
Brian  wrote:

> On Wed 30 May 2018 at 00:31:25 +0300, Abdullah Ramazanoğlu wrote:
> 
> > On Tue, 29 May 2018 20:39:28 +0100 Brian said:
> >   
> > > If a package is upgraded, surely a user would want any new
> > > packages to be installed if they are required to satisfy
> > > dependencies. apt's designed behaviour looks more sensible than
> > > apt-get's.  
> > 
> > Then removal of blocking packages are equally (if not more)
> > sensible than installing new ones. There is a well designed clear
> > cut distinction between apt-get upgrade and dist-upgrade. "upgrade"
> > upgrades the system  
> 
> As there is between apt upgrade and apt full-upgrade.
> 
> > non-intrusively, while "dist-upgrade" does that intrusively as its
> > name suggests. OTOH apt upgrade's behavior is in-between,
> > semi-intrusive, and spoils that clear-cut distinction. Therefore I
> > think apt-get works more sensible than apt in this regard.  
> 
> I'm sorry, the "intrusive/non-intrusive" aspect doesn't seem that
> useful to me. After an update, apt can tell you which packages are
> upgradable. That aspect strikes me as being very informative.
> 

This discussion led me to use apt-get again, instead of apt, which I
used to keep stretch installations up to date. The occasion was a
security update notification for the git package.

apt-get update printed 30 lines or so (sorry, I did not save the
output) but mentioned nothing about the need to upgrade.

apt-get upgrade produced no output.

There is nothing in /var/log/apt/term.log or /var/log/apt/history.log
to indicate that apt-get was used.

apt update mentioned 3 packages needing upgrade
apt upgrade processed the 3 packages and /var/log/apt/term.log
and /var/log/apt/history.log show this.

Is the above to be expected and is there some configuration change
needed if I want to use apt-get again?

 -Dan

Re: Update on my update problem with gnome system.

[Curt]

On 2018-05-30, Brian  wrote:
>
> I'm at a loss to understand the argument here. 'apt update/upgrade'
> also provides information that the user can act on. If a package on
> your system acquires a new dependency X, 'apt-get upgrade' will not
> upgrade it (is that really an upgrade? :) ) but apt upgrade will (if
> it does require the removal of an existing package).
>
> The question becomes: do you really want the system to be upgraded or
> only half-upgraded?
>

They want to be sophisticated.

Re: Update on my update problem with gnome system.

[Brian]

On Wed 30 May 2018 at 10:37:32 -0400, John Cunningham wrote:

> On Tue, May 29, 2018 at 5:37 PM Brian  wrote:
> 
> > On Tue 29 May 2018 at 15:52:12 -0400, John Cunningham wrote:
> >
> > > Not necessarily. Sometimes the dependencies get out of hand, like when a
> > > big project adopts a small utility and then decides that the entire
> > project
> > > is a dependency for the tiny utility.  It doesn't happen often, but it
> > has
> > > happened to me. I like that apt-get upgrade updates everything else. If I
> > > decide I can stomach the other packages, I can always do a apt-get
> > > dist-upgrade and install them.
> >
> > Your unfortunate (and undetailed) experience has to be balanced against
> > the benefits which accrue to most users in having an up-to-date Debian.
> 
> In my belief, it is right in the sweet spot in that regard.  It provides
> information and lets the user make the decision. It's much easier to do a
> dist-upgrade than to find and remove unwanted packages.

I'm at a loss to understand the argument here. 'apt update/upgrade'
also provides information that the user can act on. If a package on
your system acquires a new dependency X, 'apt-get upgrade' will not
upgrade it (is that really an upgrade? :) ) but apt upgrade will (if
it does require the removal of an existing package).

The question becomes: do you really want the system to be upgraded or
only half-upgraded?

-- 
Brian.

Re: Update on my update problem with gnome system.

[Brian]

On Wed 30 May 2018 at 00:31:25 +0300, Abdullah Ramazanoğlu wrote:

> On Tue, 29 May 2018 20:39:28 +0100 Brian said:
> 
> > If a package is upgraded, surely a user would want any new packages
> > to be installed if they are required to satisfy dependencies. apt's
> > designed behaviour looks more sensible than apt-get's.
> 
> Then removal of blocking packages are equally (if not more) sensible than
> installing new ones. There is a well designed clear cut distinction between
> apt-get upgrade and dist-upgrade. "upgrade" upgrades the system

As there is between apt upgrade and apt full-upgrade.

> non-intrusively, while "dist-upgrade" does that intrusively as its name
> suggests. OTOH apt upgrade's behavior is in-between, semi-intrusive, and 
> spoils
> that clear-cut distinction. Therefore I think apt-get works more sensible than
> apt in this regard.

I'm sorry, the "intrusive/non-intrusive" aspect doesn't seem that useful
to me. After an update, apt can tell you which packages are upgradable.
That aspect strikes me as being very informative.

-- 
Brian.

Re: Update on my update problem with gnome system.

[Brian]

On Wed 30 May 2018 at 08:59:31 +0200, to...@tuxteam.de wrote:

> On Tue, May 29, 2018 at 08:39:28PM +0100, Brian wrote:
> 
> [...]
> 
> > If a package is upgraded, surely a user would want any new packages
> > to be installed if they are required to satisfy dependencies. apt's
> > designed behaviour looks more sensible than apt-get's.
> 
> False dichotomy. More "newbie friendly" maybe. And that is what it
> was made for. For an experienced user, perhaps apt-get's behavior
> makes more sense.

True, experienced users have to adjust to the change in behaviour
(unless they were previously using --with-new-pkgs with apt-get),
but it is hardly a seismic event. The unification of apt-get and
apt-cache (some common directives only) is also beneficial to all
users (the target group for apt usage).
 
> Of course, it seems somewhat unfortunate that both apt and apt-get
> use the same subcommand name for slightly different things.

I agree, slightly inconvenient and takes some getting used to. We
could now argue about when is an "upgrade" not an "upgrade"? :).

-- 
Brian.

Re: Update on my update problem with gnome system.

[John Cunningham]

On Tue, May 29, 2018 at 5:37 PM Brian  wrote:

> On Tue 29 May 2018 at 15:52:12 -0400, John Cunningham wrote:
>
> > On Tue, May 29, 2018 at 3:39 PM Brian  wrote:
> >
> > > On Tue 29 May 2018 at 21:57:31 +0300, Abdullah Ramazanoğlu wrote:
> > >
> > > > On Tue, 29 May 2018 13:18:16 -0500 David Wright said:
> > > > > On Tue 29 May 2018 at 18:38:40 (+0300), Abdullah Ramazanoğlu wrote:
> > > > > > On Tue, 29 May 2018 09:14:12 -0400 Greg Wooledge said:
> > > > > > > On Sat, May 26, 2018 at 09:31:14PM +0300, Abdullah Ramazanoğlu
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > --✁
> > > > > > > > I never use apt, so I am relying on the man page.
> > > > > --✃
> > > > >
> > > > > (That got snipped.)
> > > > >
> > > > > > > That's incorrect.  One of the differences between apt and
> apt-get
> > > is
> > > > > > > that apt WILL install new packages when doing "apt upgrade"
> (but it
> > > > > > > will not remove existing packages).
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Another difference is that apt will remove all of the .deb
> files
> > > from
> > > > > > > /var/cache/apt/archives that were downloaded for the CURRENT
> apt
> > > command
> > > > > > > session (but will not remove any that were already there).
> (This
> > > > > > > behavior can be changed in a config file.)
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Hmm yes, apt upgrade do install new packages. I didn't look at
> the
> > > man page
> > > > > > for apt and assumed that -at least- the same keywords would work
> the
> > > same
> > > > > > in both apt and apt-get. I was wrong.
> > > > >
> > > > > Mmm.
> > > >
> > > > I think I owe an explanation regarding whether I referred to the man
> > > page or
> > > > not. :)
> > > >
> > > > For different operations and keywords like full-upgrade vs.
> dist-upgrade
> > > I did
> > > > refer to the man page, but it didn't occur to me that the exact same
> > > keyword
> > > > (upgrade) would behave different in apt, so I didn't cross check
> > > behavior of
> > > > "upgrade" in respective man pages. I simply assumed apt upgrade would
> > > behave
> > > > ditto apt-get upgrade.
> > > >
> > > > This is how I both do and don't look up at the man pages at the same
> > > time.
> > >
> > > If a package is upgraded, surely a user would want any new packages
> > > to be installed if they are required to satisfy dependencies. apt's
> > > designed behaviour looks more sensible than apt-get's.
> >
> > Not necessarily. Sometimes the dependencies get out of hand, like when a
> > big project adopts a small utility and then decides that the entire
> project
> > is a dependency for the tiny utility.  It doesn't happen often, but it
> has
> > happened to me. I like that apt-get upgrade updates everything else. If I
> > decide I can stomach the other packages, I can always do a apt-get
> > dist-upgrade and install them.
>
> Your unfortunate (and undetailed) experience has to be balanced against
> the benefits which accrue to most users in having an up-to-date Debian.
>

In my belief, it is right in the sweet spot in that regard.  It provides
information and lets the user make the decision. It's much easier to do a
dist-upgrade than to find and remove unwanted packages.

--John

Re: Update on my update problem with gnome system.

[tomas]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

On Tue, May 29, 2018 at 08:39:28PM +0100, Brian wrote:

[...]

> If a package is upgraded, surely a user would want any new packages
> to be installed if they are required to satisfy dependencies. apt's
> designed behaviour looks more sensible than apt-get's.

False dichotomy. More "newbie friendly" maybe. And that is what it
was made for. For an experienced user, perhaps apt-get's behavior
makes more sense.

Of course, it seems somewhat unfortunate that both apt and apt-get
use the same subcommand name for slightly different things.

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

iEYEARECAAYFAlsOS9MACgkQBcgs9XrR2kafVgCggfwFc3aCiDTVfbsmxB4JXwvA
etcAnA41FTjMt3Vde9QA5nYcrGXHMybw
=5SVQ
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

Re: Update on my update problem with gnome system.

[David Wright]

On Wed 30 May 2018 at 00:31:25 (+0300), Abdullah Ramazanoğlu wrote:
> On Tue, 29 May 2018 20:39:28 +0100 Brian said:
> 
> > If a package is upgraded, surely a user would want any new packages
> > to be installed if they are required to satisfy dependencies. apt's
> > designed behaviour looks more sensible than apt-get's.
> 
> Then removal of blocking packages are equally (if not more) sensible than
> installing new ones.

Yes and no. If I go shopping, I can put up with the kids each tossing
in some oranges or apples: they'll get eaten eventually. However, if
they were to remove the onions or the milk, there'd be trouble.

So the philosophy is that the "less sophisticated" don't mind extra
packages being thrown in but will be surprised by the disappearance
of packages they use.

> There is a well designed clear cut distinction between
> apt-get upgrade and dist-upgrade. "upgrade" upgrades the system
> non-intrusively, while "dist-upgrade" does that intrusively as its name
> suggests.

Agreed. That's one of the reasons apt-get is recommended for
scripting; another is the stable CLI interface.

> OTOH apt upgrade's behavior is in-between, semi-intrusive, and spoils
> that clear-cut distinction. Therefore I think apt-get works more sensible than
> apt in this regard.

That distinction may well be lost on many users, for whom apt might
be a better fit.

Cheers,
David.

Re: Update on my update problem with gnome system.

[David Wright]

On Tue 29 May 2018 at 22:37:08 (+0100), Brian wrote:
> On Tue 29 May 2018 at 15:52:12 -0400, John Cunningham wrote:
> 
> > On Tue, May 29, 2018 at 3:39 PM Brian  wrote:
> > 
> > > On Tue 29 May 2018 at 21:57:31 +0300, Abdullah Ramazanoğlu wrote:
> > >
> > > > On Tue, 29 May 2018 13:18:16 -0500 David Wright said:
> > > > > On Tue 29 May 2018 at 18:38:40 (+0300), Abdullah Ramazanoğlu wrote:
> > > > > > On Tue, 29 May 2018 09:14:12 -0400 Greg Wooledge said:
> > > > > > > On Sat, May 26, 2018 at 09:31:14PM +0300, Abdullah Ramazanoğlu
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > --✁
> > > > > > > > I never use apt, so I am relying on the man page.
> > > > > --✃
> > > > >
> > > > > (That got snipped.)
> > > > >
> > > > > > > That's incorrect.  One of the differences between apt and apt-get
> > > is
> > > > > > > that apt WILL install new packages when doing "apt upgrade" (but 
> > > > > > > it
> > > > > > > will not remove existing packages).
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Another difference is that apt will remove all of the .deb files
> > > from
> > > > > > > /var/cache/apt/archives that were downloaded for the CURRENT apt
> > > command
> > > > > > > session (but will not remove any that were already there).  (This
> > > > > > > behavior can be changed in a config file.)
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Hmm yes, apt upgrade do install new packages. I didn't look at the
> > > man page
> > > > > > for apt and assumed that -at least- the same keywords would work the
> > > same
> > > > > > in both apt and apt-get. I was wrong.
> > > > >
> > > > > Mmm.
> > > >
> > > > I think I owe an explanation regarding whether I referred to the man
> > > page or
> > > > not. :)
> > > >
> > > > For different operations and keywords like full-upgrade vs. dist-upgrade
> > > I did
> > > > refer to the man page, but it didn't occur to me that the exact same
> > > keyword
> > > > (upgrade) would behave different in apt, so I didn't cross check
> > > behavior of
> > > > "upgrade" in respective man pages. I simply assumed apt upgrade would
> > > behave
> > > > ditto apt-get upgrade.
> > > >
> > > > This is how I both do and don't look up at the man pages at the same
> > > time.
> > >
> > > If a package is upgraded, surely a user would want any new packages
> > > to be installed if they are required to satisfy dependencies. apt's
> > > designed behaviour looks more sensible than apt-get's.
> > 
> > Not necessarily. Sometimes the dependencies get out of hand, like when a
> > big project adopts a small utility and then decides that the entire project
> > is a dependency for the tiny utility.  It doesn't happen often, but it has
> > happened to me. I like that apt-get upgrade updates everything else. If I
> > decide I can stomach the other packages, I can always do a apt-get
> > dist-upgrade and install them.
> 
> Your unfortunate (and undetailed) experience has to be balanced against
> the benefits which accrue to most users in having an up-to-date Debian.

As I wrote (got snipped), "It [apt] wasn't designed to unify, but to
cherry-pick the parts most used by the "less sophisticated" (for want
of a better term) user. This explains the defaults chosen for it."
I guess that equates to your "most users". Fair enough.

In today's thread "File managers show files and directories in reverse order"
there was talk of Kate and Lyx, neither of which is installed here.
I toyed with installing kate just to see what the OP might be seeing.
Here's what would happen:

# apt-get -s install kate
Reading package lists...
Building dependency tree...
Reading state information...
The following additional packages will be installed:
  kactivities-bin kactivitymanagerd kate5-data kio kpackagelauncherqml
  kpackagetool5 ktexteditor-data ktexteditor-katepart libdbusmenu-qt5-2
  libfam0 libgit2-24 libgpgmepp6 libhttp-parser2.1 libkf5activities5
  libkf5archive5 libkf5attica5 libkf5auth-data libkf5auth5
  libkf5bookmarks-data libkf5bookmarks5 libkf5calendarevents5
  libkf5codecs-data libkf5codecs5 libkf5completion-data libkf5completion5
  libkf5config-bin libkf5config-data libkf5configcore5 libkf5configgui5
  libkf5configwidgets-data libkf5configwidgets5 libkf5coreaddons-data
  libkf5coreaddons5 libkf5crash5 libkf5dbusaddons-bin libkf5dbusaddons-data
  libkf5dbusaddons5 libkf5declarative-data libkf5declarative5
  libkf5globalaccel-bin libkf5globalaccel-data libkf5globalaccel5
  libkf5globalaccelprivate5 libkf5guiaddons5 libkf5i18n-data libkf5i18n5
  libkf5iconthemes-bin libkf5iconthemes-data libkf5iconthemes5
  libkf5itemmodels5 libkf5itemviews-data libkf5itemviews5
  libkf5jobwidgets-data libkf5jobwidgets5 libkf5kiocore5 libkf5kiofilewidgets5
  libkf5kiontlm5 libkf5kiowidgets5 libkf5newstuff-data libkf5newstuff5
  libkf5notifications-data libkf5notifications5 libkf5package-data
  libkf5package5 libkf5parts-data libkf5parts-plugins libkf5parts5
  libkf5plasma5 libkf5plasmaquick5 libkf5quickaddons5 libkf5service-bin
  libkf5service-data libkf5service5 libkf5solid5 

Re: Update on my update problem with gnome system.

[Brian]

On Tue 29 May 2018 at 15:52:12 -0400, John Cunningham wrote:

> On Tue, May 29, 2018 at 3:39 PM Brian  wrote:
> 
> > On Tue 29 May 2018 at 21:57:31 +0300, Abdullah Ramazanoğlu wrote:
> >
> > > On Tue, 29 May 2018 13:18:16 -0500 David Wright said:
> > > > On Tue 29 May 2018 at 18:38:40 (+0300), Abdullah Ramazanoğlu wrote:
> > > > > On Tue, 29 May 2018 09:14:12 -0400 Greg Wooledge said:
> > > > > > On Sat, May 26, 2018 at 09:31:14PM +0300, Abdullah Ramazanoğlu
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > > --✁
> > > > > > > I never use apt, so I am relying on the man page.
> > > > --✃
> > > >
> > > > (That got snipped.)
> > > >
> > > > > > That's incorrect.  One of the differences between apt and apt-get
> > is
> > > > > > that apt WILL install new packages when doing "apt upgrade" (but it
> > > > > > will not remove existing packages).
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Another difference is that apt will remove all of the .deb files
> > from
> > > > > > /var/cache/apt/archives that were downloaded for the CURRENT apt
> > command
> > > > > > session (but will not remove any that were already there).  (This
> > > > > > behavior can be changed in a config file.)
> > > > >
> > > > > Hmm yes, apt upgrade do install new packages. I didn't look at the
> > man page
> > > > > for apt and assumed that -at least- the same keywords would work the
> > same
> > > > > in both apt and apt-get. I was wrong.
> > > >
> > > > Mmm.
> > >
> > > I think I owe an explanation regarding whether I referred to the man
> > page or
> > > not. :)
> > >
> > > For different operations and keywords like full-upgrade vs. dist-upgrade
> > I did
> > > refer to the man page, but it didn't occur to me that the exact same
> > keyword
> > > (upgrade) would behave different in apt, so I didn't cross check
> > behavior of
> > > "upgrade" in respective man pages. I simply assumed apt upgrade would
> > behave
> > > ditto apt-get upgrade.
> > >
> > > This is how I both do and don't look up at the man pages at the same
> > time.
> >
> > If a package is upgraded, surely a user would want any new packages
> > to be installed if they are required to satisfy dependencies. apt's
> > designed behaviour looks more sensible than apt-get's.
> 
> Not necessarily. Sometimes the dependencies get out of hand, like when a
> big project adopts a small utility and then decides that the entire project
> is a dependency for the tiny utility.  It doesn't happen often, but it has
> happened to me. I like that apt-get upgrade updates everything else. If I
> decide I can stomach the other packages, I can always do a apt-get
> dist-upgrade and install them.

Your unfortunate (and undetailed) experience has to be balanced against
the benefits which accrue to most users in having an up-to-date Debian.

-- 
Brian.

Re: Update on my update problem with gnome system.

[John Cunningham]

On Tue, May 29, 2018 at 3:39 PM Brian  wrote:

> On Tue 29 May 2018 at 21:57:31 +0300, Abdullah Ramazanoğlu wrote:
>
> > On Tue, 29 May 2018 13:18:16 -0500 David Wright said:
> > > On Tue 29 May 2018 at 18:38:40 (+0300), Abdullah Ramazanoğlu wrote:
> > > > On Tue, 29 May 2018 09:14:12 -0400 Greg Wooledge said:
> > > > > On Sat, May 26, 2018 at 09:31:14PM +0300, Abdullah Ramazanoğlu
> wrote:
> >
> > > --✁
> > > > > > I never use apt, so I am relying on the man page.
> > > --✃
> > >
> > > (That got snipped.)
> > >
> > > > > That's incorrect.  One of the differences between apt and apt-get
> is
> > > > > that apt WILL install new packages when doing "apt upgrade" (but it
> > > > > will not remove existing packages).
> > > > >
> > > > > Another difference is that apt will remove all of the .deb files
> from
> > > > > /var/cache/apt/archives that were downloaded for the CURRENT apt
> command
> > > > > session (but will not remove any that were already there).  (This
> > > > > behavior can be changed in a config file.)
> > > >
> > > > Hmm yes, apt upgrade do install new packages. I didn't look at the
> man page
> > > > for apt and assumed that -at least- the same keywords would work the
> same
> > > > in both apt and apt-get. I was wrong.
> > >
> > > Mmm.
> >
> > I think I owe an explanation regarding whether I referred to the man
> page or
> > not. :)
> >
> > For different operations and keywords like full-upgrade vs. dist-upgrade
> I did
> > refer to the man page, but it didn't occur to me that the exact same
> keyword
> > (upgrade) would behave different in apt, so I didn't cross check
> behavior of
> > "upgrade" in respective man pages. I simply assumed apt upgrade would
> behave
> > ditto apt-get upgrade.
> >
> > This is how I both do and don't look up at the man pages at the same
> time.
>
> If a package is upgraded, surely a user would want any new packages
> to be installed if they are required to satisfy dependencies. apt's
> designed behaviour looks more sensible than apt-get's.
>

Not necessarily. Sometimes the dependencies get out of hand, like when a
big project adopts a small utility and then decides that the entire project
is a dependency for the tiny utility.  It doesn't happen often, but it has
happened to me. I like that apt-get upgrade updates everything else. If I
decide I can stomach the other packages, I can always do a apt-get
dist-upgrade and install them.

--John

Re: Update on my update problem with gnome system.

[Brian]

On Tue 29 May 2018 at 21:57:31 +0300, Abdullah Ramazanoğlu wrote:

> On Tue, 29 May 2018 13:18:16 -0500 David Wright said:
> > On Tue 29 May 2018 at 18:38:40 (+0300), Abdullah Ramazanoğlu wrote:
> > > On Tue, 29 May 2018 09:14:12 -0400 Greg Wooledge said:
> > > > On Sat, May 26, 2018 at 09:31:14PM +0300, Abdullah Ramazanoğlu wrote:  
> 
> > --✁
> > > > > I never use apt, so I am relying on the man page.  
> > --✃
> > 
> > (That got snipped.)
> > 
> > > > That's incorrect.  One of the differences between apt and apt-get is
> > > > that apt WILL install new packages when doing "apt upgrade" (but it
> > > > will not remove existing packages).
> > > > 
> > > > Another difference is that apt will remove all of the .deb files from
> > > > /var/cache/apt/archives that were downloaded for the CURRENT apt command
> > > > session (but will not remove any that were already there).  (This
> > > > behavior can be changed in a config file.)  
> > > 
> > > Hmm yes, apt upgrade do install new packages. I didn't look at the man 
> > > page
> > > for apt and assumed that -at least- the same keywords would work the same
> > > in both apt and apt-get. I was wrong.  
> > 
> > Mmm.
> 
> I think I owe an explanation regarding whether I referred to the man page or
> not. :)
> 
> For different operations and keywords like full-upgrade vs. dist-upgrade I did
> refer to the man page, but it didn't occur to me that the exact same keyword
> (upgrade) would behave different in apt, so I didn't cross check behavior of
> "upgrade" in respective man pages. I simply assumed apt upgrade would behave
> ditto apt-get upgrade.
> 
> This is how I both do and don't look up at the man pages at the same time.

If a package is upgraded, surely a user would want any new packages
to be installed if they are required to satisfy dependencies. apt's
designed behaviour looks more sensible than apt-get's.

-- 
Brian.

Re: Update on my update problem with gnome system.

[Abdullah Ramazanoğlu]

On Tue, 29 May 2018 13:18:16 -0500 David Wright said:
> On Tue 29 May 2018 at 18:38:40 (+0300), Abdullah Ramazanoğlu wrote:
> > On Tue, 29 May 2018 09:14:12 -0400 Greg Wooledge said:
> > > On Sat, May 26, 2018 at 09:31:14PM +0300, Abdullah Ramazanoğlu wrote:  

> --✁
> > > > I never use apt, so I am relying on the man page.  
> --✃
> 
> (That got snipped.)
> 
> > > That's incorrect.  One of the differences between apt and apt-get is
> > > that apt WILL install new packages when doing "apt upgrade" (but it
> > > will not remove existing packages).
> > > 
> > > Another difference is that apt will remove all of the .deb files from
> > > /var/cache/apt/archives that were downloaded for the CURRENT apt command
> > > session (but will not remove any that were already there).  (This
> > > behavior can be changed in a config file.)  
> > 
> > Hmm yes, apt upgrade do install new packages. I didn't look at the man page
> > for apt and assumed that -at least- the same keywords would work the same
> > in both apt and apt-get. I was wrong.  
> 
> Mmm.

I think I owe an explanation regarding whether I referred to the man page or
not. :)

For different operations and keywords like full-upgrade vs. dist-upgrade I did
refer to the man page, but it didn't occur to me that the exact same keyword
(upgrade) would behave different in apt, so I didn't cross check behavior of
"upgrade" in respective man pages. I simply assumed apt upgrade would behave
ditto apt-get upgrade.

This is how I both do and don't look up at the man pages at the same time.

Regards
-- 
Abdullah Ramazanoğlu

Re: Update on my update problem with gnome system.

[David Wright]

On Tue 29 May 2018 at 18:38:40 (+0300), Abdullah Ramazanoğlu wrote:
> On Tue, 29 May 2018 09:14:12 -0400 Greg Wooledge said:
> 
> > On Sat, May 26, 2018 at 09:31:14PM +0300, Abdullah Ramazanoğlu wrote:
> > > apt or apt-get upgrade does upgrade in passive mode: It never install new
> > > packages, never removes existing ones. Just upgrades existing ones as far 
> > > as
> > > possible.  

--✁
> > > I never use apt, so I am relying on the man page.
--✃

(That got snipped.)

> > That's incorrect.  One of the differences between apt and apt-get is
> > that apt WILL install new packages when doing "apt upgrade" (but it
> > will not remove existing packages).
> > 
> > Another difference is that apt will remove all of the .deb files from
> > /var/cache/apt/archives that were downloaded for the CURRENT apt command
> > session (but will not remove any that were already there).  (This
> > behavior can be changed in a config file.)
> 
> Hmm yes, apt upgrade do install new packages. I didn't look at the man page 
> for
> apt and assumed that -at least- the same keywords would work the same in both
> apt and apt-get. I was wrong.

Mmm.

> I wonder why apt should be so close to apt-get but confusingly different. One
> has dist-upgrade with certain functionality, the other has full-upgrade with
> different functionality. Upgrade function works different between them. Who
> knows what else.
> 
> AIUI apt-get is the older and more complete tool. I don't know what was the
> reason for inventing apt. It is not higher level, it is not as complete as
> apt-get, it is not conformant (to apt-get). Perhaps the idea was to unify
> apt-get and apt-cache into one tool, but it was done badly IMO.

It wasn't designed to unify, but to cherry-pick the parts most used by
the "less sophisticated" (for want of a better term) user. This
explains the defaults chosen for it. It may also evolve with time in
a way that might make it hazardous for script users, particularly if
they don't keep up with the man pages.

Wisely, the OP quoted the precise commands they used, something that
all too often doesn't happen. The confusion over command/actions arose
later in the thread for no good reason. That's not the fault of apt
or apt-get.

> I don't use apt anyway. Sticking to good old apt-get and apt-cache.

Their aim is to preserve their interface across upgrades, so that scripts
using them (as recommended) don't require incessant modification.

Cheers,
David.

Re: Update on my update problem with gnome system.

[Abdullah Ramazanoğlu]

On Tue, 29 May 2018 09:14:12 -0400 Greg Wooledge said:

> On Sat, May 26, 2018 at 09:31:14PM +0300, Abdullah Ramazanoğlu wrote:
> > apt or apt-get upgrade does upgrade in passive mode: It never install new
> > packages, never removes existing ones. Just upgrades existing ones as far as
> > possible.  
> 
> That's incorrect.  One of the differences between apt and apt-get is
> that apt WILL install new packages when doing "apt upgrade" (but it
> will not remove existing packages).
> 
> Another difference is that apt will remove all of the .deb files from
> /var/cache/apt/archives that were downloaded for the CURRENT apt command
> session (but will not remove any that were already there).  (This
> behavior can be changed in a config file.)

Hmm yes, apt upgrade do install new packages. I didn't look at the man page for
apt and assumed that -at least- the same keywords would work the same in both
apt and apt-get. I was wrong.

I wonder why apt should be so close to apt-get but confusingly different. One
has dist-upgrade with certain functionality, the other has full-upgrade with
different functionality. Upgrade function works different between them. Who
knows what else.

AIUI apt-get is the older and more complete tool. I don't know what was the
reason for inventing apt. It is not higher level, it is not as complete as
apt-get, it is not conformant (to apt-get). Perhaps the idea was to unify
apt-get and apt-cache into one tool, but it was done badly IMO.

I don't use apt anyway. Sticking to good old apt-get and apt-cache.

Regards
-- 
Abdullah Ramazanoğlu

Re: Update on my update problem with gnome system.

[Greg Wooledge]

On Sat, May 26, 2018 at 09:31:14PM +0300, Abdullah Ramazanoğlu wrote:
> apt or apt-get upgrade does upgrade in passive mode: It never install new
> packages, never removes existing ones. Just upgrades existing ones as far as
> possible.

That's incorrect.  One of the differences between apt and apt-get is
that apt WILL install new packages when doing "apt upgrade" (but it
will not remove existing packages).

Another difference is that apt will remove all of the .deb files from
/var/cache/apt/archives that were downloaded for the CURRENT apt command
session (but will not remove any that were already there).  (This
behavior can be changed in a config file.)

Re: Update on my update problem with gnome system.

[David Wright]

On Sat 26 May 2018 at 15:45:02 (-0400), Cindy-Sue Causey wrote:
> On 5/26/18, Pétùr  wrote:
> > Le 25/05/2018 à 21:33, Joe a écrit :
> >>> Le 19/05/2018 à 21:03, Hans a écrit :
>  Isn't it today "apt update" and "apt full-upgrade"?
> >>> Thanks, I didn't know this new "full-upgrade" command.
> >>>
> >>> Is "apt full-upgrade" equivalent to "apt-get dist-upgrade" (or apt
> >>> dist-upgrade)?
> >
> >> More or less. Apt-get is actually a bit less intelligent, but in the
> >> case of upgrades of very large numbers of packages (400+), that seems to
> >> work better. It has been recommended for several version upgrades in
> >> preference to aptitude.
> >>
> >> I haven't used apt, but I've used aptitude to upgrade long-neglected
> >> unstable installations, and I've known it to run overnight without
> >> finding a solution.
> >>
> >> For smaller numbers of packages, aptitude (and presumably apt) is
> >> generally quicker at reaching a solution, apt-get may have to be run a
> >> few times with selected packages to break an impasse.
> >
> > I don't use aptitude. I use only apt and apt-get but I believe apt is
> > just a shortcut for apt-get. `apt update` is equivalent for me to
> > `apt-get update` and `apt dist-upgrade` to `apt-get dist-upgrade`
> > (correct me if I am wrong).
> 
> 
> On occasion, I'm able to interchangeably use a suggest apt command
> with apt-get instead. That's most likely not 100%, though. Just means
> I got lucky a time or ten. :)
> 
> 
> > My question was if apt (or apt-get) dist-upgrade was equivalent of apt
> > (or apt-get) full-upgrade?
> 
> 
> I can't directly answer your question, but I *could* at least grab
> something from "man". :)
> 
> >From "man apt-get" (I only found dist-upgrade referenced there):
> 
> dist-upgrade : dist-upgrade in addition to performing the function of
> upgrade, also intelligently handles changing dependencies with new
> versions of packages; apt-get has a "smart" conflict resolution
> system, and it will attempt to upgrade the most important packages at
> the expense of less important ones if necessary. The dist-upgrade
> command may therefore remove some packages. The /etc/apt/sources.list
> file contains a list of locations from which to retrieve desired
> package files. See also apt_preferences(5) for a mechanism for
> overriding the general settings for individual packages.
> 
> >From "man apt" (I only found full-upgrade referenced there):
> 
> full-upgrade (apt-get(8)): full-upgrade performs the function of
> upgrade but will remove currently installed packages if this is needed
> to upgrade the system as a whole.

I think that closes the circle:
https://lists.debian.org/debian-user/2018/05/msg00847.html

Of course one is free to try both approaches and compare them
in at least a couple of ways:

→   -s for simulate,
→   just say no when asked to proceed.

Cheers,
David.

Re: Update on my update problem with gnome system.

[Cindy-Sue Causey]

On 5/26/18, Pétùr  wrote:
> Le 25/05/2018 à 21:33, Joe a écrit :
>>> Le 19/05/2018 à 21:03, Hans a écrit :
 Isn't it today "apt update" and "apt full-upgrade"?
>>> Thanks, I didn't know this new "full-upgrade" command.
>>>
>>> Is "apt full-upgrade" equivalent to "apt-get dist-upgrade" (or apt
>>> dist-upgrade)?
>
>> More or less. Apt-get is actually a bit less intelligent, but in the
>> case of upgrades of very large numbers of packages (400+), that seems to
>> work better. It has been recommended for several version upgrades in
>> preference to aptitude.
>>
>> I haven't used apt, but I've used aptitude to upgrade long-neglected
>> unstable installations, and I've known it to run overnight without
>> finding a solution.
>>
>> For smaller numbers of packages, aptitude (and presumably apt) is
>> generally quicker at reaching a solution, apt-get may have to be run a
>> few times with selected packages to break an impasse.
>
> I don't use aptitude. I use only apt and apt-get but I believe apt is
> just a shortcut for apt-get. `apt update` is equivalent for me to
> `apt-get update` and `apt dist-upgrade` to `apt-get dist-upgrade`
> (correct me if I am wrong).


On occasion, I'm able to interchangeably use a suggest apt command
with apt-get instead. That's most likely not 100%, though. Just means
I got lucky a time or ten. :)


> My question was if apt (or apt-get) dist-upgrade was equivalent of apt
> (or apt-get) full-upgrade?


I can't directly answer your question, but I *could* at least grab
something from "man". :)

>From "man apt-get" (I only found dist-upgrade referenced there):

dist-upgrade : dist-upgrade in addition to performing the function of
upgrade, also intelligently handles changing dependencies with new
versions of packages; apt-get has a "smart" conflict resolution
system, and it will attempt to upgrade the most important packages at
the expense of less important ones if necessary. The dist-upgrade
command may therefore remove some packages. The /etc/apt/sources.list
file contains a list of locations from which to retrieve desired
package files. See also apt_preferences(5) for a mechanism for
overriding the general settings for individual packages.

>From "man apt" (I only found full-upgrade referenced there):

full-upgrade (apt-get(8)): full-upgrade performs the function of
upgrade but will remove currently installed packages if this is needed
to upgrade the system as a whole.

*hm.* :)

Kind of sounds at least very similar, just that description is not as
verbose for "man apt". The "man apt-get" blurb helps *me* feel a
little more confident that I *might* better understand what *might* be
about to happen if I go that route.

With respect to "man apt-get" specifically suggesting/highlighting
"apt_preferences(5)"... the fun would be in determining what
individual packages might be direly affected such that an overriding
mechanism would be necessary.

"apt_preferences(5)" wasn't likewise specifically mentioned directly
related to "full-upgrade" in "man apt", but there was a helpful
bottom-of-the-page reference that did still point users toward "man 5
apt_preferences". It's then up to us users to heed those additionally
suggested manpages as potentially being important to whatever we may
be trying to accomplish. :)

Cindy :)
-- 
Cindy-Sue Causey
Talking Rock, Pickens County, Georgia, USA

* runs with duct tape *

Re: Update on my update problem with gnome system.

[Abdullah Ramazanoğlu]

On Sat, 26 May 2018 20:08:59 +0200 Pétùr said:
 
> I don't use aptitude. I use only apt and apt-get but I believe apt is
> just a shortcut for apt-get. `apt update` is equivalent for me to
> `apt-get update` and `apt dist-upgrade` to `apt-get dist-upgrade`
> (correct me if I am wrong).
> 
> My question was if apt (or apt-get) dist-upgrade was equivalent of apt
> (or apt-get) full-upgrade?

There is no "apt-get full-upgrade" nor "apt dist-upgrade".

apt or apt-get upgrade does upgrade in passive mode: It never install new
packages, never removes existing ones. Just upgrades existing ones as far as
possible.

apt-get dist-upgrade does upgrade in proactive mode: It installs new packages
and removes existing packages if need be.

OTOH apt full-upgrade works in between: It never installs new packages (as in
upgrade), but removes existing packages if need be.

I never use apt, so I am relying on the man page. It seems that there is no
equivalent of "apt-get dist-upgrade" in apt.

Regards
-- 
Abdullah Ramazanoğlu

Re: Update on my update problem with gnome system.

[Pétùr]

Le 25/05/2018 à 21:33, Joe a écrit :
>> Le 19/05/2018 à 21:03, Hans a écrit :
>>> Isn't it today "apt update" and "apt full-upgrade"?  
>> Thanks, I didn't know this new "full-upgrade" command.
>>
>> Is "apt full-upgrade" equivalent to "apt-get dist-upgrade" (or apt
>> dist-upgrade)?

> More or less. Apt-get is actually a bit less intelligent, but in the
> case of upgrades of very large numbers of packages (400+), that seems to
> work better. It has been recommended for several version upgrades in
> preference to aptitude.
> 
> I haven't used apt, but I've used aptitude to upgrade long-neglected
> unstable installations, and I've known it to run overnight without
> finding a solution.
> 
> For smaller numbers of packages, aptitude (and presumably apt) is
> generally quicker at reaching a solution, apt-get may have to be run a
> few times with selected packages to break an impasse.

I don't use aptitude. I use only apt and apt-get but I believe apt is
just a shortcut for apt-get. `apt update` is equivalent for me to
`apt-get update` and `apt dist-upgrade` to `apt-get dist-upgrade`
(correct me if I am wrong).

My question was if apt (or apt-get) dist-upgrade was equivalent of apt
(or apt-get) full-upgrade?

Re: Update on my update problem with gnome system.

[Kenneth Parker]

On Fri, May 25, 2018 at 2:17 PM, Pétùr  wrote:

>
>
> >dist-upgrade
> >dist-upgrade in addition to performing the function of
> upgrade, also intelligently
> >handles changing dependencies with new versions of packages;
> apt-get has a "smart"
> >conflict resolution system, and it will attempt to upgrade
> the most important packages
> >at the expense of less important ones if necessary. The
> dist-upgrade command may
> >therefore remove some packages. The /etc/apt/sources.list
> file contains a list of
> >locations from which to retrieve desired package files. See
> also apt_preferences(5)
> >for a mechanism for overriding the general settings for
> individual packages.
>
> Warning:  Ubuntu ("close enough" to Debian to confuse me, multiple years)
regularly requires dist-upgrade to do their frequent Kernel Upgrades,
because they change Version Numbers on, among other things, the vmlinuz
file.  So, when I do "apt-get upgrade" on the remaining Ubuntu Laptop, I
regularly see things like,

>> root@EyeBlinkLenovo:~# apt-get -d upgrade
>> Reading package lists... Done
>> Building dependency tree
>> Reading state information... Done
>> Calculating upgrade... Done
>> The following packages have been kept back:
>>   linux-generic linux-headers-generic linux-image-generic
linux-signed-generic linux-signed-image-generic linux-tools-generic
>> 0 upgraded, 0 newly installed, 0 to remove and 6 not upgraded.

But then, "apt-get dist-upgrade" gets me "new packages", where only a
"sub-version" is different.  For example, when the "smoke clears" from the
dist-upgrade, my "vmlinuz", in my /boot directory consists of (among other
things)

>> vmlinuz-4.4.0-124-generic
>> vmlinuz-4.4.0-127-generic

Note that these are different Packages.

Now I know, that Ubuntu is aimed, at a less technical audience, but this
threw me for a loop (and came to the foreground, when I didn't allocate a
large enough /boot partition.  I had to learn "apt-get autoremove" in a
HURRY!!!  Oh well.  I;m sure each of you have your own Administration War
Stories).

But this "Feature Creep" on the Linux Kernel, is why I am here now,
"upgrading" my Ubuntu Server Systems to Debian 9.4.  Once again, Go Debian!)

So, once again, watch out for "dist-upgrade", if there's any "hint" of
Ubuntu (i.e.   Mint, Elementary OS, and many others out there).

Word to the Wise.

Kenneth Parker

Re: Update on my update problem with gnome system.

[Joe]

On Fri, 25 May 2018 20:17:52 +0200
Pétùr  wrote:

> Le 19/05/2018 à 21:03, Hans a écrit :
> > Isn't it today "apt update" and "apt full-upgrade"?  
> 
> Thanks, I didn't know this new "full-upgrade" command.
> 
> Is "apt full-upgrade" equivalent to "apt-get dist-upgrade" (or apt
> dist-upgrade)?
> 
> According to the man pages (man apt and man apt-get), dist-upgrade
> "intelligently handles changing dependencies" when full-upgrade justs
> "remove currently installed packages if this is needed".
> 

More or less. Apt-get is actually a bit less intelligent, but in the
case of upgrades of very large numbers of packages (400+), that seems to
work better. It has been recommended for several version upgrades in
preference to aptitude.

I haven't used apt, but I've used aptitude to upgrade long-neglected
unstable installations, and I've known it to run overnight without
finding a solution.

For smaller numbers of packages, aptitude (and presumably apt) is
generally quicker at reaching a solution, apt-get may have to be run a
few times with selected packages to break an impasse.

-- 
Joe

Re: Update on my update problem with gnome system.

[Pétùr]

Le 19/05/2018 à 21:03, Hans a écrit :
> Isn't it today "apt update" and "apt full-upgrade"?

Thanks, I didn't know this new "full-upgrade" command.

Is "apt full-upgrade" equivalent to "apt-get dist-upgrade" (or apt
dist-upgrade)?

According to the man pages (man apt and man apt-get), dist-upgrade
"intelligently handles changing dependencies" when full-upgrade justs
"remove currently installed packages if this is needed".


>full-upgrade (apt-get(8))
>full-upgrade performs the function of upgrade but will remove 
> currently installed
>packages if this is needed to upgrade the system as a whole.
> 

>dist-upgrade
>dist-upgrade in addition to performing the function of upgrade, 
> also intelligently
>handles changing dependencies with new versions of packages; 
> apt-get has a "smart"
>conflict resolution system, and it will attempt to upgrade the 
> most important packages
>at the expense of less important ones if necessary. The 
> dist-upgrade command may
>therefore remove some packages. The /etc/apt/sources.list file 
> contains a list of
>locations from which to retrieve desired package files. See also 
> apt_preferences(5)
>for a mechanism for overriding the general settings for individual 
> packages.

Re: Update on my update problem with gnome system.

[Abdullah Ramazanoğlu]

On Sat, 19 May 2018 21:27:42 +0300 Abdullah Ramazanoğlu said:
> On Sat, 19 May 2018 10:37:08 -0400 Matthew Dyer said:

>> root@matt-the-cat:/home/matthew# apt-get update && apt-get dist-upgrade
>> Hit:1 http://security.debian.org/debian-security testing/updates InRelease
>> Hit:2 http://ftp.us.debian.org/debian testing InRelease
>> Reading package lists... Done  
> 
> It seems to be the "apt-get update" part of output, which is curiously terse.
> If update is not working, then upgrade will neither work, naturally. Just to
> be sure that "update" output is not trimmed somehow, could you run the command
> below and attach the generated "update.log" file here?
> 
> # apt-get update 2>&1 | tee update.log
> 
> It would be better if you also attach /etc/apt/sources.list

While it is early yet to speculate, I would also check;

* /etc/apt/sources.list : This file should be same as the one in MATE
  installation.
* /etc/apt/preferences : This file should not exist.
* /etc/apt/preferences.d/ : This directory should be empty.
* /etc/apt/sources.list.d/ : This directory should be empty.
* /etc/apt/apt.conf.d/ : This directory should not have been tampered with.
* /etc/apt/apt.conf.d/99synaptic : This file either should not exist, or should
  be empty.

I would have compared these files and directories to the ones in the MATE
installation.

Regards
-- 
Abdullah Ramazanoğlu

Re: Update on my update problem with gnome system.

[songbird]

Matthew Dyer wrote:
...

these things come to mind:

  - perhaps you have automatic upgrades set up on
Gnome?

  there should be some record in /var/log/apt or
/var/log/dpkg.log of what is being updated.

  - if you have a fast enough connection it doesn't
hurt to make sure /var/lib/apt/lists files are 
consistent (i have erased them and redownloaded 
at times to get through strange apt-get issues).

  - if you have been messing with apt preferences you
may have messed that up.  dunno what you've been up
to.

  - there aren't any updates to apply at this time.


  songbird

Re: Update on my update problem with gnome system.

[Hans]

Am Samstag, 19. Mai 2018, 20:26:25 CEST schrieb songbird:

Isn't it today "apt update" and "apt full-upgrade"?

It is also possible, to use "aptitude" (aptitude update && aptittude dist-
upgrade) but be warned: aptitude for upgrading from one release to another is 
no good choice. However, aptitude does a good daily job at an actual and 
upgraded system. 

So, I suggest to try "apt update && apt full-upgrade", but this only works in 
testing.

Good luck!

Hans

Re: Update on my update problem with gnome system.

[songbird]

Matthew Dyer wrote:
> Mornning all,
>
>
> A few days ago I reported a  problem whare the gnome testing system 
> which I am now using to write this message.  Here is the resault.
>
>
> I did a clean install of the system using the alfa testing image.  I 
> then edited the sources list and changed the lines from buster to 
> testing.  I then did a sudo apt-get update && apt-get dist-upgrade which 
> installed the securety updates it found yesterday.  his morning I did 
> the same command and here is the output from that update.
>
>
> root@matt-the-cat:/home/matthew# apt-get update && apt-get dist-upgrade
> Hit:1 http://security.debian.org/debian-security testing/updates InRelease
> Hit:2 http://ftp.us.debian.org/debian testing InRelease
> Reading package lists... Done
> Reading package lists... Done
> Building dependency tree
> Reading state information... Done
> Calculating upgrade... Done
> 0 upgraded, 0 newly installed, 0 to remove and 0 not upgraded.
> root@matt-the-cat:/home/matthew#
>
> Any ideas on why this is happens?  If any one has any ideas on how to 
> fix this without having to reinstall.
>
>>
>> root@matt-the-cat:/home/matthew# apt-get update && apt-get dist-upgrade
>> Hit:1 http://security.debian.org/debian-security testing/updates InRelease
>> Hit:2 http://ftp.us.debian.org/debian testing InRelease
>> Reading package lists... Done
>> Reading package lists... Done
>> Building dependency tree
>> Reading state information... Done
>> Calculating upgrade... Done
>> 0 upgraded, 0 newly installed, 0 to remove and 0 not upgraded.
>> root@matt-the-cat:/home/matthew#
>> n
>   reinstall please let me know as it is really strange.  My mate system 
> does not have this problem.  Thanks.

  it looks like your /etc/apt/sources.list file doesn't
contain all the lines for testing or they are improperly 
formed?


mine look like:

deb http://http.us.debian.org/debian/ testing main contrib non-free 
deb http://security.debian.org/debian-security testing/updates main contrib 
non-free
deb-src http://http.us.debian.org/debian/ testing main contrib non-free 
deb-src http://security.debian.org/debian-security testing/updates main contrib 
non-free


  songbird

Update on my update problem with gnome system.

[Matthew Dyer]

Mornning all,


A few days ago I reported a  problem whare the gnome testing system 
which I am now using to write this message.  Here is the resault.



I did a clean install of the system using the alfa testing image.  I 
then edited the sources list and changed the lines from buster to 
testing.  I then did a sudo apt-get update && apt-get dist-upgrade which 
installed the securety updates it found yesterday.  his morning I did 
the same command and here is the output from that update.



root@matt-the-cat:/home/matthew# apt-get update && apt-get dist-upgrade
Hit:1 http://security.debian.org/debian-security testing/updates InRelease
Hit:2 http://ftp.us.debian.org/debian testing InRelease
Reading package lists... Done
Reading package lists... Done
Building dependency tree
Reading state information... Done
Calculating upgrade... Done
0 upgraded, 0 newly installed, 0 to remove and 0 not upgraded.
root@matt-the-cat:/home/matthew#

Any ideas on why this is happens?  If any one has any ideas on how to 
fix this without having to reinstall.




root@matt-the-cat:/home/matthew# apt-get update && apt-get dist-upgrade
Hit:1 http://security.debian.org/debian-security testing/updates InRelease
Hit:2 http://ftp.us.debian.org/debian testing InRelease
Reading package lists... Done
Reading package lists... Done
Building dependency tree
Reading state information... Done
Calculating upgrade... Done
0 upgraded, 0 newly installed, 0 to remove and 0 not upgraded.
root@matt-the-cat:/home/matthew#
n
 reinstall please let me know as it is really strange.  My mate system 
does not have this problem.  Thanks.



Matthew