[Aptitude-devel] Bug#826941: Bug#826941: aptitude: inconsistent decisions for auto-installed package removal / empty list for the reason

On 2016-06-11 01:04:25 +0200, Axel Beckert wrote: > Hi, > > Vincent Lefevre wrote: > > After doing an update ("u" in the UI) and tried to upgrade ("U"), > > which I cancelled, > > How have you cancelled it? Ctrl-u > > aptitude wants to remove two packages: > > > > --\ Packages being removed

[Aptitude-devel] Bug#816781: aptitude: Can not cancel pending upgrade actions

Hi, 2016-05-25 10:02 Andrei Demekhov: Hello, Manuel, I cannot cancel pending actions which were scheduled by parsing the output from debsecan in this way: # debsecan --only-fixed --suite sid|fgrep urgency |fgrep -v low|awk '{print $2}'|sort -u|xargs aptitude --schedule-only install This

Re: [Aptitude-devel] aptitude: close failed in file object destructor: sys.excepthook is missing lost sys.stderr

Hi Paul, 2016-06-11 03:49 Paul Wise: On Sat, 2016-06-11 at 01:31 +0200, Axel Beckert wrote: No idea, sorry. David? It appears the only Python based hook I have installed is apt-listchanges. I did some codesearch and found this Python issue: https://bugs.python.org/issue11380

[Aptitude-devel] Bug#497137: closed by "Manuel A. Fernandez Montecelo" <manuel.montez...@gmail.com> (Re: "download" command ignores cache and directly goes to HTTP!)

B> aptitude is going to use apt command direcly for this, so any problem of B> the implementation to be submitted there (I was told that there's a bug B> number about this, but couldn't find it after a few minutes searching). OK. Maybe download really means download. Well I just report things

[Aptitude-devel] Bug#825901: Internal error: couldn't generate list of packages to download

MAFM> What does "dpkg --status imagemagick" say? In the end I completely purged all the imagemagick stuff and then reinstalled fresh. Now everything is normal. Otherwise just by upgrading I saw nightmares like "/etc/etc/" directories, etc. ___

Re: [Aptitude-devel] aptitude: close failed in file object destructor: sys.excepthook is missing lost sys.stderr

On Sat, 2016-06-11 at 12:29 +0100, Manuel A. Fernandez Montecelo wrote: > When aptitude doesn't need to do anything "gg" shouldn't perform any > action, but it currently does.  (On the other hand, if there's nothing > to do, you as "user" wouldn't have any reason to press "gg" either). To be

[Aptitude-devel] Bug#141663: aptitude: new group "New Packages in Woody" like "New Packages" for people using pins

Hi, 2016-06-09 12:59 Jö Fahlke: Hi! Thanks for looking at this. But you misunderstood what I had been asking. "~N ~Aunstable" will not select the packages that are "new in unstable". It will select the packages that are "new" *and* that are "in unstable" -- which is something quite

[Aptitude-devel] Bug#768047: Bug#768047: aptitude: doesn't inform a user that a package will no longer receive updates when it obsolete in the target suite, but not yet for an older suite

Control: tags -1 + wontfix Control: close -1 Hi, Will not reply to all the details, the whole thread is quite unwieldy, but some comments here and there: 2014-11-05 04:06 Axel Beckert: Just because e.g. lcms1 is no longer upgraded in unstable, this should mean that aptitude proposes it to

[Aptitude-devel] Bug#658635: Resolver extremely reluctant to upgrade packages to experimental, even as dependencies of packages in experimental

2016-06-11 19:06 Josh Triplett: On Sat, Jun 11, 2016 at 06:57:14PM +0100, Manuel A. Fernandez Montecelo wrote: The mechanism is there, it's just not automatically applied just by asking to upgrade, and I don't think that it should be changed at this point. I don't think that installing a

[Aptitude-devel] Processed: Re: Internal error: couldn't generate list of packages to download

Processing control commands: > tags -1 - moreinfo Bug #825901 [aptitude] Internal error: couldn't generate list of packages to download Removed tag(s) moreinfo. > close -1 Bug #825901 [aptitude] Internal error: couldn't generate list of packages to download Marked Bug as done -- 825901:

[Aptitude-devel] Processed: Re: aptitude calls localepurge even if the invocation installed no package(s)

Processing control commands: > reassign -1 localepurge Bug #689238 [aptitude] aptitude calls localepurge even if the invocation installed no package(s) Bug reassigned from package 'aptitude' to 'localepurge'. No longer marked as found in versions aptitude/0.6.8.1-2. Ignoring request to alter

[Aptitude-devel] Bug#689238: aptitude calls localepurge even if the invocation installed no package(s)

Control: reassign -1 localepurge Hi, 2012-09-30 18:55 Mark Caglienzi: Package: aptitude Version: 0.6.8.1-2 Severity: normal Dear Maintainer, I have localepurge installed, and when I do something like: # aptitude install $package and the package name is misspelled, If the package is

[Aptitude-devel] Bug#820436: marked as done (www.debian.org: en and fr descriptions of APT::AutoRemove::RecommendsImportant in aptitude manual are inconsistent)

Your message dated Sat, 11 Jun 2016 14:12:55 +0100 with message-id <20160611131253.ga23...@reva.itsari.org> and subject line Re: www.debian.org: en and fr descriptions of APT::AutoRemove::RecommendsImportant in aptitude manual are inconsistent has caused the Debian Bug report #820436, regarding

[Aptitude-devel] Bug#822272: aptitude: No more forgets reinstallation instruction after reinstallation has happened

Hi, Manuel A. Fernandez Montecelo wrote: > Even if you can reproduce it, as I said in a previous message, I think > that part of the reason was that you were using self-built copies -- > when the checksums don't match. […] > So I am closing this bug for the time being. Fine for me, yes.

[Aptitude-devel] Bug#827050: aptitude: limiting view to manually installed (~m) does not work

Package: aptitude Version: 0.6.11-1+b1 Severity: normal -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hi, I'm looking for a package that I know I installed manually, but whose name I've forgotten, so I tried limiting the listing to manually installed packages (~m), but I'm shown all packages

[Aptitude-devel] Bug#827050: aptitude: limiting view to manually installed (~m) does not work

close 827050 thanks On 11.06.2016 18:06, Simon Richter wrote: > I'm looking for a package that I know I installed manually, but whose name > I've forgotten, so I tried limiting the listing to manually installed > packages (~m), but I'm shown all packages still. Limiting to automatically >

[Aptitude-devel] Bug#658635: Resolver extremely reluctant to upgrade packages to experimental, even as dependencies of packages in experimental

On Sat, Jun 11, 2016 at 01:03:39PM +0100, Manuel A. Fernandez Montecelo wrote: > 2012-02-04 19:10 Josh Triplett: > > Package: aptitude > > Version: 0.6.4-1.2 > > Severity: normal > > > > I've run into similar problems before, but this time I had something I > > could easily reproduce and provide

[Aptitude-devel] Bug#822272: aptitude: No more forgets reinstallation instruction after reinstallation has happened

Control: tags -1 - moreinfo Control: close -1 Hi, 2016-05-05 17:10 Manuel A. Fernandez Montecelo: 2016-04-25 19:22 Manuel A. Fernandez Montecelo: 2016-04-25 12:22 Axel Beckert: Hi Manuel, Manuel A. Fernandez Montecelo wrote: If I select a package for reinstallation by pressing "L" in the

[Aptitude-devel] Processed: Re: aptitude: No more forgets reinstallation instruction after reinstallation has happened

Processing control commands: > tags -1 - moreinfo Bug #822272 [aptitude] aptitude: No more forgets reinstallation instruction after reinstallation has happened Removed tag(s) moreinfo. > close -1 Bug #822272 [aptitude] aptitude: No more forgets reinstallation instruction after reinstallation

[Aptitude-devel] Processed: Re: aptitude: Sort removed packaged at last

Processing control commands: > tags -1 - confirmed + wontfix Bug #401994 [aptitude] aptitude: Sort removed packaged at last Removed tag(s) confirmed. Bug #401994 [aptitude] aptitude: Sort removed packaged at last Added tag(s) wontfix. > close -1 Bug #401994 [aptitude] aptitude: Sort removed

[Aptitude-devel] Processed: Re: Bug#827050: aptitude: limiting view to manually installed (~m) does not work

Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: > close 827050 Bug #827050 [aptitude] aptitude: limiting view to manually installed (~m) does not work Marked Bug as done > thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. -- 827050:

[Aptitude-devel] Bug#658635: Resolver extremely reluctant to upgrade packages to experimental, even as dependencies of packages in experimental

Control: severity -1 wishlist Control: tags -1 + wontfix Control: close -1 Hi Josh, 2012-02-04 19:10 Josh Triplett: Package: aptitude Version: 0.6.4-1.2 Severity: normal I've run into similar problems before, but this time I had something I could easily reproduce and provide a transcript

[Aptitude-devel] Processed: Re: Resolver extremely reluctant to upgrade packages to experimental, even as dependencies of packages in experimental

Processing control commands: > severity -1 wishlist Bug #658635 [aptitude] Resolver extremely reluctant to upgrade packages to experimental, even as dependencies of packages in experimental Severity set to 'wishlist' from 'normal' > tags -1 + wontfix Bug #658635 [aptitude] Resolver extremely

[Aptitude-devel] Bug#658635: Resolver extremely reluctant to upgrade packages to experimental, even as dependencies of packages in experimental

2016-06-11 18:14 GMT+01:00 Josh Triplett : > On Sat, Jun 11, 2016 at 01:03:39PM +0100, Manuel A. Fernandez Montecelo wrote: >> 2012-02-04 19:10 Josh Triplett: >> > Package: aptitude >> > Version: 0.6.4-1.2 >> > Severity: normal >> > >> > I've run into similar problems

[Aptitude-devel] Bug#825901: Internal error: couldn't generate list of packages to download

Control: tags -1 - moreinfo Control: close -1 2016-06-11 10:21 GMT+01:00 積丹尼 Dan Jacobson : > MAFM> What does "dpkg --status imagemagick" say? > > In the end I completely purged all the imagemagick stuff and then > reinstalled fresh. Now everything is normal. > > > Otherwise

[Aptitude-devel] Bug#658635: Resolver extremely reluctant to upgrade packages to experimental, even as dependencies of packages in experimental

On Sat, Jun 11, 2016 at 06:57:14PM +0100, Manuel A. Fernandez Montecelo wrote: > 2016-06-11 18:14 GMT+01:00 Josh Triplett : > > On Sat, Jun 11, 2016 at 01:03:39PM +0100, Manuel A. Fernandez Montecelo > > wrote: > >> 2012-02-04 19:10 Josh Triplett: > >> > Package: aptitude >