Yassine Chaouche wrote:
> In my ongoing mission for precise package management,
> I embarked on a quest to swiftly locate all installed packages dependent on
> /mysql-server/.
> Swift reconnaissance led me to /aptitude/, our stalwart ally in the Debian
> arsenal.
> Executing a
Debian Users,
In my ongoing mission for precise package management,
I embarked on a quest to swiftly locate all installed packages dependent on
/mysql-server/.
Swift reconnaissance led me to /aptitude/, our stalwart ally in the Debian
arsenal.
Executing a tactical maneuver akin
Je suis passé de bulleseye(11) à bookworm(12) en suivant quasi à la
lettre :
https://www.debian.org/releases/bookworm/amd64/release-notes/ch-upgrading.en.html
Je reconnais m'etre lancé en serrant les fesses, parce que ma dernière
tentative (Il y a déjà 2 ou 3 versions précédentes..) ne s'était
la plus sûre, avant chaque montée de version, est
> d'oublier ses habitudes et de lire soigneusement les notes de versions (a
> minima la section relative aux mises à jour) qui indiquent toutes les
> précautions à prendre et recommandent (implicitement ou explicitement) quel
> outil
Bonjour,
Le mardi 25 juillet 2023, phep a écrit...
> C'est assez logique, la commande 'safe-upgrade' ne doit pas être utilisée
> pour les montées de version. C'est la commande 'full-upgrade' (anciennement
> 'dist-upgrade' - et qui fonctionne encore avec ce nom assez explicite) qui
>
Bonjour,
Le 09/07/2023 à 15:54, Jean-Michel OLTRA a écrit :
J'ai effectué une première mise à jour de serveur (de test) de bullseye vers
bookworm, avec aptitude.
La commande `aptitude safe-upgrade` a fait un tas d'erreur (dont des choses
ennuyeuses comme systemd).
C'est assez logique, la
@lists.debian.org
> Envoyé: Dimanche 9 Juillet 2023 17:52:04
> Objet: Re: Re : mise a jour bullseye vers bookworkm avec aptitude
> Bonjour,
> Le dimanche 09 juillet 2023, nicolas.patr...@gmail.com a écrit...
> > C’est marrant, pour moi c’est l’inverse.
> > J’utilise apt la
Bonjour,
Le dimanche 09 juillet 2023, nicolas.patr...@gmail.com a écrit...
> C’est marrant, pour moi c’est l’inverse.
> J’utilise apt la majorité du temps mais quand il merde (mise à jour bloquée),
> je mets à jour avec aptitude (qui permet plus de choses qu’apt) en
On 09/07/2023 16:58:47, didier gaumet wrote:
> oui, dans bookworm aptitude semble moins performant que apt: je ne
> sais plus sur quoi ça portait exactement mais je me suis retrouvé bloqué
> avec aptitude (interactif) et j'ai débloqué ça avec apt
C’est marrant, pour moi c’est
oui, dans bookworm aptitude semble moins performant que apt: je ne sais
plus sur quoi ça portait exactement mais je me suis retrouvé bloqué avec
aptitude (interactif) et j'ai débloqué ça avec apt
Bonjour,
Pour info.
J'ai effectué une première mise à jour de serveur (de test) de bullseye vers
bookworm, avec aptitude.
La commande `aptitude safe-upgrade` a fait un tas d'erreur (dont des choses
ennuyeuses comme systemd).
Les tentatives d'utilisation d'aptitude pour forcer des
e days and one annoying bug in the openbox window manager
> occured less often.
>
> On Dec 1, I did aptitude update && aptitude full-upgrade and it found
> lots of dependency problems. It seems this was mainly caused by
> changing from gcc-8 to gcc-10 and python 3.7 to
On Dec 1, I did aptitude update && aptitude full-upgrade and it found
lots of dependency problems. It seems this was mainly caused by
changing from gcc-8 to gcc-10 and python 3.7 to python 3.9. I accepte
the second suggestion to solve these problems, removing a couple of
packages, and t
'm also getting:
> >
> > E; Packae '' has no installation candidate
> >
> > or is alerady the newest version ()
> >
> > dpkg -l | grep -v ^ii | wc -l
> > 209
> >
> > Which is lower than before, but aptitude still runs for hours resolving
>
erady the newest version ()
>
> dpkg -l | grep -v ^ii | wc -l
> 209
>
> Which is lower than before, but aptitude still runs for hours resolving
> dependencies and exhausts RAM and swap.
With aptitude you might want to try running
aptitude keep-all
> The remaini
ix broken
> > > > dependencies,
> > > > broken packages, etc, and they all return without error now [1], but
> > > > aptitude
> > > > starts "resolving dependencies" and it soon uses up all the available
> > > > RAM,
&g
ies and some packages (like some vim addon) don't work at all.
> > > Vim, for instance is unusable.
> > >
> > > I have tried all the dpkg/apt/apt-get commands to fix broken dependencies,
> > > broken packages, etc, and they all return without error now [1], but
> > Vim, for instance is unusable.
> >
> > I have tried all the dpkg/apt/apt-get commands to fix broken dependencies,
> > broken packages, etc, and they all return without error now [1], but
> > aptitude
> > starts "resolving dependencies" and it soon uses up al
ands to fix broken dependencies,
> broken packages, etc, and they all return without error now [1], but aptitude
> starts "resolving dependencies" and it soon uses up all the available RAM,
> then all the available swap and the system slows down (thrashing) and then
> freezes.
D
> broken packages, etc, and they all return without error now [1], but aptitude
> starts "resolving dependencies" and it soon uses up all the available RAM,
> then all the available swap and the system slows down (thrashing) and then
> freezes.
my recommendation would
without error now [1], but aptitude
starts "resolving dependencies" and it soon uses up all the available RAM,
then all the available swap and the system slows down (thrashing) and then
freezes.
Earlier on, I fixed /etc/apt/sources.list and the apt/apt-get/dpkg commands
installed and re
On 9/25/21 2:08 AM, Rodolfo Medina wrote:
Please help with this:
# aptitude update
Hit http://dl.google.com/linux/chrome/deb stable InRelease
Get: 1 http://ftp.debian.org/debian stable InRelease [113 kB]
Get: 2 http://ftp.uk.debian.org/debian stable InRelease [113 kB]
E: Repository 'http
On Saturday, September 25, 2021 08:32:26 AM Greg Wooledge wrote:
> When you're ready to upgrade to a newer stable release, you can read
> through the release notes, and take the time to perform the upgrade
> properly.
All replies I've seen so far mention this (reading (and following) the release
wing,
such as "buster" or "bullseye".
When you're ready to upgrade to a newer stable release, you can read
through the release notes, and take the time to perform the upgrade
properly.
> # aptitude update
> Hit http://dl.google.com/linux/chrome/deb stable InRel
On Sat, Sep 25, 2021 at 09:08:55AM +, Rodolfo Medina wrote:
> Please help with this:
>
> # aptitude update
> Hit http://dl.google.com/linux/chrome/deb stable InRelease
> Get: 1 http://ftp.debian.org/debian stable InRelease [113 kB]
> Get: 2 http://ftp.uk.debian.org/debia
Please help with this:
# aptitude update
Hit http://dl.google.com/linux/chrome/deb stable InRelease
Get: 1 http://ftp.debian.org/debian stable InRelease [113 kB]
Get: 2 http://ftp.uk.debian.org/debian stable InRelease [113 kB]
E: Repository 'http://ftp.debian.org/debian stable InRelease' changed
On Mon, 19 Jul 2021 19:44:02 +
Julius Hamilton wrote:
> I tried to search for aptitude with apt-cache search aptitude and it
> returned nothing. I also tried apt-get install aptitude and it said no
> package was found.
>
> I am on Ubuntu 20.
This is a Debian list. Did yo
On 7/19/21 10:44 PM, Julius Hamilton wrote:
anyone know why
- just tried :
#apt search aptitude
- turns up stuff
.
rgds
.
On 20-07-2021 05:44, Julius Hamilton wrote:
> Hey,
>
> I tried to search for aptitude with apt-cache search aptitude and it
> returned nothing. I also tried apt-get install aptitude and it said no
> package was found.
>
> I am on Ubuntu 20.
>
> Would anyone know why
Hey,
I tried to search for aptitude with apt-cache search aptitude and it
returned nothing. I also tried apt-get install aptitude and it said no
package was found.
I am on Ubuntu 20.
Would anyone know why aptitude is missing from my packages list?
Thanks very much,
Julius
On Tue, Jan 26, 2021 at 04:37:39PM -0500, Harry Putnam wrote:
> I use both apt and cmdline aptitude. Mostly cmdline aptitude
>
> I'm curios if when I call `apt update' or `aptitude update', if they
> are refreshing the same database files... wondering if I could do just
> one u
I use both apt and cmdline aptitude. Mostly cmdline aptitude
I'm curios if when I call `apt update' or `aptitude update', if they
are refreshing the same database files... wondering if I could do just
one update on either tool and that would do both.
On Ma, 27 oct 20, 13:03:32, David Wright wrote:
> On Tue 27 Oct 2020 at 15:05:36 (+0200), Andrei POPESCU wrote:
> > On Lu, 26 oct 20, 09:55:00, John Hasler wrote:
> >
> > I believe someone demonstrated quite recently on list that dpkg has some
> > limits in the number and/or combination of
On Tue 27 Oct 2020 at 15:05:36 (+0200), Andrei POPESCU wrote:
> On Lu, 26 oct 20, 09:55:00, John Hasler wrote:
> > Andrei writes:
> > > dpkg does its own dependency checking, in addition to APT (the
> > > software, not the command), and will prevent any inconsistencies
> > > unless you use one of
On Lu, 26 oct 20, 09:55:00, John Hasler wrote:
> Andrei writes:
> > dpkg does its own dependency checking, in addition to APT (the
> > software, not the command), and will prevent any inconsistencies
> > unless you use one of the --force switches.
>
> What it does not do is resolve dependencies.
So, if you don't pin down the priority of deb-multimedia, virtually every
audio- and video-related package on your system will be replaced with the
deb-multimedia version, which for the sake of stability is very likely a
bad idea.
So it is safer to lower the priority of deb-multimedia and that of
mess
with apt's dependencies and cause nasty situations ("dependency hell")
> In other words, should I stick to aptitude's decision?
I really recommend to do the pinning first, then re-run
$ apt update
and then look again what is suggested when you call apt-get upgrade or
apt
To resolve this, you might consider to create a file
like e.g. /etc/apt/preferences.d/multimedia .
Here the content of that file looks like:
Package: *
Pin: release o=Unofficial Multimedia Packages,n=buster
Pin-Priority: 332
Package: *
Pin: release o=Unofficial Multimedia
Andrei writes:
> dpkg does its own dependency checking, in addition to APT (the
> software, not the command), and will prevent any inconsistencies
> unless you use one of the --force switches.
What it does not do is resolve dependencies. Apt recursively resolves
dependencies, installing them as
in addition to APT (the software,
not the command), and will prevent any inconsistencies unless you use
one of the --force switches.
In my opinion this is pretty safe ;)
APT, aptitude and others are more than just front ends to dpkg as they
are also the ones working with your configured reposito
l
(...)
> My apt-get/aptitude output showed clear differences between the two.
> So, I am not convinced about your claim that they should do the same
> thing on a stable release unless stable release itself was broken when
> installing with debian-10.6.0-amd64-netinst.iso.
it looks like wha
To begin with, which distribution is it? In general, with Stable, it
pretty much doesn't matter which tool is used. The kind of problems you
have indicate Unstable or Testing.
First, apt is pretty much apt-get, with different syntax and a few
extra features. Aptitude can generally do a better
On Sun, 25 Oct 2020 12:12:19 -0500
Ram Ramesh wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I am trying to upgrade the current setup and I am unable to
> understand the differences between aptitude vs. apt-get usage.
> When I do apt-get -s upgrade, I get
> > myth2 [rramesh] 100 > sudo apt-ge
Hi,
I am trying to upgrade the current setup and I am unable to
understand the differences between aptitude vs. apt-get usage.
When I do apt-get -s upgrade, I get
myth2 [rramesh] 100 > sudo apt-get -s upgrade
Reading package lists... Done
Building dependency tree
Reading state informat
On Wed, Aug 12, 2020 at 1:58 AM Andrei POPESCU wrote:
>
> On Ma, 11 aug 20, 15:33:53, Javier Barroso wrote:
> >
> > I swiched from aptitude to apt-get/apt some years ago
> >
> > aptitude need love :(
> >
> > My problem was mixing 64 and 32 bits packag
On Ma, 11 aug 20, 15:33:53, Javier Barroso wrote:
>
> I swiched from aptitude to apt-get/apt some years ago
>
> aptitude need love :(
>
> My problem was mixing 64 and 32 bits packages. Seem aptitude didn't do a
> good job
>
> Reading Planet debian and transitio
El mar., 11 ago. 2020 13:31, Andrei POPESCU
escribió:
> On Vi, 07 aug 20, 13:31:53, Default User wrote:
> > Hey guys,
> >
> > Recently there was a thread about aptitude dependency resolution
> > limitations.
>
> If you are referring to the limitations of
On Vi, 07 aug 20, 13:31:53, Default User wrote:
> Hey guys,
>
> Recently there was a thread about aptitude dependency resolution
> limitations.
If you are referring to the limitations of 'aptitude why', this 1)
reverse dependency and 2) apt / apt-get don't even have (a
On Sat, 08 Aug 2020 13:06:50 +0200
Johann Klammer wrote:
> On 08/07/2020 10:10 PM, Joe wrote:
> > On Fri, 7 Aug 2020 13:31:53 -0400
> > Default User wrote:
> >
> >> Hey guys,
> >>
> >> Recently there was a thread about aptitude dependency res
On 08/07/2020 10:10 PM, Joe wrote:
> On Fri, 7 Aug 2020 13:31:53 -0400
> Default User wrote:
>
>> Hey guys,
>>
>> Recently there was a thread about aptitude dependency resolution
>> limitations.
>>
>> Years ago, I believe I read in the Debian docume
* 2020-08-07 20:04:24-03, riveravaldez wrote:
> On Friday, August 7, 2020, Joe wrote:
>> I believe it is still aptitude.
>>
>> However, the length of time it takes increases sharply with number of
>> packages to be upgraded. If you have more than a hundred or so,
On Friday, August 7, 2020, Joe wrote:
> On Fri, 7 Aug 2020 13:31:53 -0400
> Default User wrote:
>> So, all other things being equal, which is currently considered to be
>> the best at dependency resolution?
>
> I believe it is still aptitude.
>
> However, the len
On Fri, 7 Aug 2020 13:31:53 -0400
Default User wrote:
> Hey guys,
>
> Recently there was a thread about aptitude dependency resolution
> limitations.
>
> Years ago, I believe I read in the Debian documentation that aptitude
> was preferred to apt-get, because it
Hey guys,
Recently there was a thread about aptitude dependency resolution
limitations.
Years ago, I believe I read in the Debian documentation that aptitude was
preferred to apt-get, because it seemed to have better dependency
resolution.
Now, we have apt, as well.
So, all other things being
On 2020-08-07 14:08 +0200, Harald Dunkel wrote:
> On 8/5/20 6:29 PM, Sven Joachim wrote:
>> I am not sure I understand what you actually want to do, though.
>>
>
> I am maintaining a set of meta packages, referencing the packages
> to install on my hosts. To avoid having separate meta packages
On 8/5/20 6:29 PM, Sven Joachim wrote:
I am not sure I understand what you actually want to do, though.
I am maintaining a set of meta packages, referencing the packages
to install on my hosts. To avoid having separate meta packages for
each new Debian version I have to use conditional
On 2020-08-06 at 07:24, Dan Ritter wrote:
> Urs Thuermann wrote:
>
>> $ aptitude why libpam-systemd
>> i systemd Recommends libpam-systemd
>> $ aptitude why policykit-1 libpam-systemd
>> i A policykit-1 Depends libpam-systemd
>>
>> But now I see
On Thu, Aug 6, 2020, 7:42 AM Dan Ritter wrote:
> Urs Thuermann wrote:
> > $ aptitude why libpam-systemd
> > i systemd Recommends libpam-systemd
> > $ aptitude why policykit-1 libpam-systemd
> > i A policykit-1 Depends libpam-systemd
> >
> > But now I se
Urs Thuermann wrote:
> $ aptitude why libpam-systemd
> i systemd Recommends libpam-systemd
> $ aptitude why policykit-1 libpam-systemd
> i A policykit-1 Depends libpam-systemd
>
> But now I see reason: policykit-1 is also installed only because
> virt-manager *recommends*
David Wright writes:
> On Wed 05 Aug 2020 at 22:53:26 (+0200), Urs Thuermann wrote:
>
> > Should this be considered a bug? Shouldn't 'aptitude why' show the
> > packages that depend on it?
>
> Why not read the man page:
>
>Note
>aptitude why
Hello,
perhaps options described here could help you:
https://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/aptitude/ch02s05s05.en.html
On 2020-08-05 12:33 +0200, Harald Dunkel wrote:
> On 8/5/20 11:03 AM, Sven Joachim wrote:
>> I am surprised to read that, considering that your installed lxc
>> version
>> does not actually fulfill the dependency. Note the epoch.
>> $ dpkg --compare-versions 1:2.0.11-1~xgo90+1 lt 3 || echo 'Got
On 8/5/20 11:03 AM, Sven Joachim wrote:
I am surprised to read that, considering that your installed lxc version
does not actually fulfill the dependency. Note the epoch.
$ dpkg --compare-versions 1:2.0.11-1~xgo90+1 lt 3 || echo 'Got it!'
Got it!
Maintaining the sample-lxc package I have
This package provides LXC for our environment.
>
> lxc-templates is available only for lxc >= 3 (Buster or Bullseye), and
> then its a must-have in my environment.
>
> Trying to install this package on Stretch aptitude complains about a
> missing lxc-templates package, even
c >= 3 (Buster or Bullseye), and
then its a must-have in my environment.
Trying to install this package on Stretch aptitude complains about a
missing lxc-templates package, even though the most recent lxc version
1:2.0.11-1~xgo90+1 is installed.
apt and apt-get are fine, AFAICS.
???
Regards
Harri
kage and all "subpackages" the
> > package depends on. Normally I use aptitude to install packages.
>
> Something like this should do the trick:
>
> # aptitude reinstall mypackage '~i~Rmypackage'
>
> See the "Search term reference" in the aptitude use
On 2020-07-31 15:10 +0200, local10 wrote:
> Am looking for a way to reinstall a package and all "subpackages" the
> package depends on. Normally I use aptitude to install packages.
Something like this should do the trick:
# aptitude reinstall mypackage '~i~Rmypackage'
See
source more
> available. I do not consider it a major improvement over aptitude or the
> whole debian and linux project. But should you consider using it for
> commercial purposes, or outside open-source goals and aims, I would like to
> know, and ask to discuss such use.
&
Am looking for a way to reinstall a package and all "subpackages" the package
depends on. Normally I use aptitude to install packages.
Any ideas? Thanks
On 2020-04-23 09:19:10 +0300, Andrei POPESCU wrote:
> This is controlled by the apt configuration options
>
> APT::AutoRemove::RecommendsImportant
> APT::AutoRemove::SuggestsImportant
>
> See apt.conf(5) for how to adjust these.
The user may want to keep Recommends.
--
Vincent Lefèvre
pbian jessie:
[...]
> But after many updates/upgrades no installed package needs
> gcc-4.8-base anymore but it hasn't been removed. If I check why it's
> still installed I get:
>
> # aptitude why gcc-4.8-base
> i cron Recommends exim4 | postfix | mail-transport-agent
&g
ing Raspbian jessie:
[Be aware that I'm two versions ahead of jessie, and have never used
either a PI or the Raspbian OS.]
> Some time in the past there were probably packages that needed
> gcc-4.8-base so it were installed automatically:
>
> # aptitude show gcc-4.8-base
> Pa
On 2020-04-22 16:39:00 -0400, The Wanderer wrote:
> I don't find 'aptitude why' very reliable in a lot of cases.
Ditto.
> One thing I habitually do nowadays, to minimize this type of problem, is
> to also run
>
> # apt-get remove $(deborphan)
>
> and interleave that bac
you care about.
Well, I usually just call aptitude purge without --simulate because I
want unneeded packages to be really removed and aptitude asks for
confirmation if it would need to remove more packages. Here, with -s,
but you can see that gcc-4.8-base is really not needed by anything.
# aptitu
e:
>
> Some time in the past there were probably packages that needed
> gcc-4.8-base so it were installed automatically:
> But after many updates/upgrades no installed package needs
> gcc-4.8-base anymore but it hasn't been removed. If I check why
> it's still installed I ge
gcc-4.8-base so it were installed automatically:
# aptitude show gcc-4.8-base
Package: gcc-4.8-base
State: installed
Automatically installed: yes
Multi-Arch: same
Version: 4.8.4-1
Priority: required
Section: libs
Maintainer: Debian GCC Maintainers
Architecture: armhf
Uncompressed Size: 176 k
Ça vient du paquet appstream qu'il faut neutraliser.
Cordialement
Le March 27, 2020 6:12:46 PM UTC, Erwan David a écrit :
>Le 27/03/2020 à 18:56, Étienne Mollier a écrit :
>>
>> Bonjour,
>>
>> Pour compléter la réponse, il est possible d'interdire
>> l'installation de paquets lors d'un appel à
Le 27/03/2020 à 18:56, Étienne Mollier a écrit :
>
> Bonjour,
>
> Pour compléter la réponse, il est possible d'interdire
> l'installation de paquets lors d'un appel à apt en suffixant le
> nom de ce dernier avec un moins. Comparez les sorties de ces
> deux commandes pour voir :
>
> $ apt
Daniel Caillibaud, on 2020-03-27 14:40:07 +0100:
> Le 27/03/20 à 13:24, Erwan David a écrit :
> > Lorsque je fais un aptitude -u ou un apt update, j'ai plusiseurs méga
> > octets d'icônes. Sachant que je n'utilise pas les frontend graphiqiues,
> > comment faire pour n
Le 27/03/20 à 13:24, Erwan David a écrit :
> Lorsque je fais un aptitude -u ou un apt update, j'ai plusiseurs méga
> octets d'icônes. Sachant que je n'utilise pas les frontend graphiqiues,
> comment faire pour ne pas les télécharger ?
Retirer le paquet qui contient ces icones et don
Bonjour,
Lorsque je fais un aptitude -u ou un apt update, j'ai plusiseurs méga
octets d'icônes. Sachant que je n'utilise pas les frontend graphiqiues,
comment faire pour ne pas les télécharger ?
> On 2019-07-08 19:21 +0200, Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote:
>
>> I am trying to look which packages are new in buster that were not in
>> stretch. I am using aptitude since it't great tool for browsing packages.
Sven Joachim wrote:
> Beware that the list of new packages
On 2019-07-08 19:21 +0200, Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote:
> I am trying to look which packages are new in buster that were not in
> stretch. I am using aptitude since it't great tool for browsing packages.
Beware that the list of new packages in buster is way too large to
browse ca
Hello,
I am trying to look which packages are new in buster that were not in
stretch. I am using aptitude since it't great tool for browsing packages.
until now it was easy:
do 'f'orget new packages in aptitude
change sources.list to point to new release
do 'u'pdate packages list
... voila
On Thu, Jan 31, 2019 at 07:12:13PM -0200, China wrote:
> O apt-get é uma implementação mais antiga, o aptitude é mais novo e
> classificado como "mais inteligente" por tratar melhor a lista de pacotes e
> suas dependências. Geralmente o apt-get tolera melhor as cagadas que a gen
Reza a lenda que aptitude foi criado para ser o substituto do apt-get,
porém o apt-get foi atualizado para apt
Em sex, 1 de fev de 2019 às 10:21, Daniel Roma <
vendedor.softwareli...@gmail.com> escreveu:
> ok,muito obrigado pela ajuda. vou entar nos links indicados e qualquer
> duy
ok,muito obrigado pela ajuda. vou entar nos links indicados e qualquer
duyvida retorno pra perguntar.
até
Em qui, 31 de jan de 2019 às 19:12, China escreveu:
> O apt-get é uma implementação mais antiga, o aptitude é mais novo e
> classificado como "mais inteligente" por tratar m
O apt-get é uma implementação mais antiga, o aptitude é mais novo e
classificado como "mais inteligente" por tratar melhor a lista de pacotes e
suas dependências. Geralmente o apt-get tolera melhor as cagadas que a
gente faz quando nos metemos a instalar de fontes não oficiais de
desen
On 31-01-2019 13:04, Ednardo Lobo wrote:
> On 31/01/2019 12:43, Daniel Roma wrote:
>> ola pessoal tudo bem?
>
> Tudo joia!
>
>> Tenho uma duvida.: qual é a diferença de usar apt-get e aptitude? Ambos
>> fazem a mesma coisa, atualizar os programas do computador?
>
On 31/01/2019 12:43, Daniel Roma wrote:
ola pessoal tudo bem?
Tudo joia!
Tenho uma duvida.: qual é a diferença de usar apt-get e aptitude? Ambos
fazem a mesma coisa, atualizar os programas do computador?
Não fazem exatamente a mesma coisa, mas têm por objetivo final o mesmo
propósito
as informações relacionadas a isso. Acredito que
nela você encontrará tudo, basta dedicar um tempo para sua leitura. Se
ainda tiver dúvidas, fica a vontade pra perguntar.
Aqui é o manual do APT
https://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/apt-howto/
E aqui do aptitude
https://wiki.debian.org/Aptitude?action
ola pessoal tudo bem?
Tenho uma duvida.: qual é a diferença de usar apt-get e aptitude? Ambos
fazem a mesma coisa, atualizar os programas do computador?
E se eu quiser procurar um programa ou atualização,tem algum comando no
terminal que faz isso?
Obrigado pela ajuda
; >
> >et pour remettre en service:
> > echo "toto install" | dpkg --set-selections
> >
> > Cordialement,
>
> Je crois que l'idée est de "remettre en service" automatiquement sans
> intervention.
>
> Avec aptitude j'ai une opt
Le 16/11/2018 à 14:30, fab a écrit :
> en vrai, je ne connaissais pas. J'ai juste cherché dans duckduckgo
> https://duckduckgo.com/?q=apt+get+hold+version+package=ffab=v101-3=web
>
> et j'ai pris le 2nd lien:
> https://askubuntu.com/questions/18654/how-to-prevent-updating-of-a-specific-package
>
>
super, merci !
en vrai, je ne connaissais pas. J'ai juste cherché dans duckduckgo
https://duckduckgo.com/?q=apt+get+hold+version+package=ffab=v101-3=web
et j'ai pris le 2nd lien:
https://askubuntu.com/questions/18654/how-to-prevent-updating-of-a-specific-package
et je n'ai pas testé non
Salut,
Je te rajoute un petit lien si tu veux en savoir plus sur les preferences
d'apt section 6.2.5:
https://debian-handbook.info/browse/fr-FR/stable/sect.apt-get.html#sect.apt.priorities
Bonne lecture !
Le ven. 16 nov. 2018 12:17, Jérémy Prego a écrit :
> Le 16/11/2018 à 12:08, fab a
Bonjour
Pour "geler" la mise à jour d'un paquet
aptitude hold lePaquet
pour le dégeler
aptitude unhold lePaquet
pour lister les paquets gelés
sudo dpkg --list | grep ^hi
sudo aptitude search "~ahold"
++
Cyrille
Le 2018-11-16 11:37, Jérémy Prego a écrit :
bonjour,
M
| dpkg --set-selections
>
> Cordialement,
Je crois que l'idée est de "remettre en service" automatiquement sans
intervention.
Avec aptitude j'ai une option forbid-version ça doit bien se trouver aussi avec
apt je suppose (apt-cache ou autre chose ?).
Le 16/11/2018 à 12:08, fab a écrit :
> 'lut,
>
> Pour bloquer une version spécifique d'un paquet, c'est dans
> /etc/apt/preferences
>
> Package: ton_paquet
> Pin: version la_version_bolquée
> Pin-Priority: -1
>
super, merci !
> a+
>
++
> f.
>
>
Jerem
our pour un paquet:
>>
>> echo "toto hold" | dpkg --set-selections
>>
>> et pour remettre en service:
>>
>> echo "toto install" | dpkg --set-selections
>>
> le problème avec cette technique, c'est qu'il faut vérifié manuelleme
1 - 100 of 6306 matches
Mail list logo
