So, it turns out this is surprisingly tricky. The problem is that the
aptitude initialization process runs a mark-and-sweep before the whole
package system is ready. That seems very dicey to me, but the comments
seem to indicate that it's necessary to force apt to behave properly
with auto flag
On Wed, Apr 28 at 21:07, Daniel Burrows penned:
>
> With aptitude 0.6.2+, I'd be curious to know whether you get the
> answers you want (with less removals and less need to manually
> hold) with this setting or something like it:
>
> Aptitude::ProblemResolver::SolutionCost="2*removals +
> c
On Tue, Apr 27, 2010 at 09:59:19AM -0600, "Monique Y. Mudama"
was heard to say:
> I use "hold" liberally to weather Sid storms. There are two cases I
> see crop up: one, aptitude suggests removing packages without an
> obvious replacement. Two, aptitude marks things as broken that have
> been w
On Tue, Apr 27, 2010 at 10:32:25AM -0500, "Boyd Stephen Smith Jr."
was heard to say:
> On Tuesday 27 April 2010 08:48:48 Daniel Burrows wrote:
> > Essentially, it causes held packages to be added to the root
> > set (and that's the best implementation, I think: modify aptitude's
> > custom root s
On Tue, Apr 27 at 10:32, Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. penned:
> On Tuesday 27 April 2010 08:48:48 Daniel Burrows wrote:
>
> > Essentially, it causes held packages to be added to the root set
> > (and that's the best implementation, I think: modify aptitude's
> > custom root set function to include held
On Tuesday 27 April 2010 08:48:48 Daniel Burrows wrote:
> aptitude's resolver will *still* upgrade held packages
Oh noes!
> A temporary solution for you is to cancel the auto flag on any
> package you hold.
Simple enough.
> Long-term solutions in the code could include postponing dependen
Package: aptitude
Version: 0.6.2.1-2
aptitude's resolver will *still* upgrade held packages, due to an
interaction between the dependency solver and unused package removal.
Unused packages are removed before dependencies get solved, and
sometimes the dependency solver has to put a package "back"
On Fri, Apr 23 at 7:16, Daniel Burrows penned:
> On Tue, Apr 20, 2010 at 05:44:20PM -0600, "Monique Y. Mudama"
> was heard to say:
> > For some reason, this just now triggered a memory for me. I think
> > sometimes when aptitude is making suggestions to resolve
> > conflicts, it will un-hold pac
On Tue, Apr 20, 2010 at 05:44:20PM -0600, "Monique Y. Mudama"
was heard to say:
> For some reason, this just now triggered a memory for me. I think
> sometimes when aptitude is making suggestions to resolve conflicts, it
> will un-hold packages. I wonder if this is how your explicit hold gets
>
On Wed, Apr 21, 2010 at 03:27:28PM +, T o n g was
heard to say:
> On Tue, 20 Apr 2010 22:33:14 -0700, Daniel Burrows wrote:
> > Can you provide any more information about this? It shouldn't happen
> > in any recent version of aptitude.
>
> I can only give you partial information.
>
> Th
On Tue, 20 Apr 2010 23:10:24 + (UTC)
T o n g wrote:
Hello T,
> Yes, that's what I am doing now. Moreover, I've put it on hold in both
> dpkg and aptitude, but somehow it still get upgraded from time to time.
If you're going to deal with durep outside the package management system,
do so /c
On Tue, 20 Apr 2010 22:33:14 -0700, Daniel Burrows wrote:
>> I am talking about the *standalone* durep package. I don't like the new
>> 0.9 version but rather prefer the old 0.8 version. However, even I've
>> put it on hold in dpkg/aptitude, from time to time if I do a 'aptitude
>> safe- upgrade',
On Tue, Apr 20, 2010 at 03:22:00PM +, T o n g was
heard to say:
> I am talking about the *standalone* durep package. I don't like the new
> 0.9 version but rather prefer the old 0.8 version. However, even I've put
> it on hold in dpkg/aptitude, from time to time if I do a 'aptitude safe-
>
On Tue, Apr 20 at 23:31, T o n g penned:
> On Tue, 20 Apr 2010 17:26:02 -0600, Monique Y. Mudama wrote:
>
> > On Tue, Apr 20 at 23:10, T o n g penned:
> >>
> >> Yes, that's what I am doing now. Moreover, I've put it on hold in
> >> both dpkg and aptitude, but somehow it still get upgraded from
>
On Tue, 20 Apr 2010 17:26:02 -0600, Monique Y. Mudama wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 20 at 23:10, T o n g penned:
>>
>> Yes, that's what I am doing now. Moreover, I've put it on hold in both
>> dpkg and aptitude, but somehow it still get upgraded from time to time.
>
> Pardon me for asking this, but what
On Tue, Apr 20 at 23:10, T o n g penned:
>
> Yes, that's what I am doing now. Moreover, I've put it on hold in
> both dpkg and aptitude, but somehow it still get upgraded from time
> to time.
Pardon me for asking this, but what method are you using to hold the
package?
This is from my aptitude
On Tue, 20 Apr 2010 18:31:06 +0100, Brad Rogers wrote:
>> How can I trick my Debian into thinking that a package is not
>> installed?
>
> Your best option is, as others have said, to use pinning. If that
> doesn't work, or you prefer not to use that method, you could
>
> 1) simply uninstall dur
On Tue, 20 Apr 2010 15:22:00 + (UTC)
T o n g wrote:
Hello T,
> How can I trick my Debian into thinking that a package is not
> installed?
Your best option is, as others have said, to use pinning. If that
doesn't work, or you prefer not to use that method, you could
1) simply uninstall dur
On Tue, Apr 20, 2010 at 03:22:00PM +, T o n g wrote:
> How can I trick my Debian into thinking that a package is not installed?
>
> I am talking about the *standalone* durep package. I don't like the new
> 0.9 version but rather prefer the old 0.8 version. However, even I've put
> it on hold
On 2010-04-20 10:22, T o n g wrote:
Hi,
How can I trick my Debian into thinking that a package is not installed?
I am talking about the *standalone* durep package. I don't like the new
0.9 version but rather prefer the old 0.8 version. However, even I've put
it on hold in dpkg/aptitude, from
Hi,
How can I trick my Debian into thinking that a package is not installed?
I am talking about the *standalone* durep package. I don't like the new
0.9 version but rather prefer the old 0.8 version. However, even I've put
it on hold in dpkg/aptitude, from time to time if I do a 'aptitude safe
21 matches
Mail list logo
