Re: Question on dpkg -l output.
Thanks. Thats also what the maintainer of dpkg answered me to my bug report. On 23/12/18 6:49 μ.μ., Pascal Hambourg wrote: Le 22/12/2018 à 02:44, aprekates a écrit : Indeed some are virtual or pure virtual (although i dont know the diff) But also there are packages like 'ergo' which look normal and the only relation i think found (reason to display it) is because libstd++6 depends on it. Also listed packages like 'wink' not in the repos any more. dpkg -l may show packages which are not installed but are mentionned in installed packages dependencies (Recommends, Suggests, Conflicts...) or were installed and removed but not purged (leaving config files).
Re: Question on dpkg -l output.
Le 22/12/2018 à 02:44, aprekates a écrit : Indeed some are virtual or pure virtual (although i dont know the diff) But also there are packages like 'ergo' which look normal and the only relation i think found (reason to display it) is because libstd++6 depends on it. Also listed packages like 'wink' not in the repos any more. dpkg -l may show packages which are not installed but are mentionned in installed packages dependencies (Recommends, Suggests, Conflicts...) or were installed and removed but not purged (leaving config files).
Re: Question on dpkg -l output.
Yes, i noticed that w* will pass if there is no such file in current dir. But still i cant understand the output so i submit bugreport Bug#917098: Thanks all for the feedback. On 22/12/18 6:13 μ.μ., Joe Pfeiffer wrote: Dan Ritter writes: Eduardo M KALINOWSKI wrote: On 21 de dezembro de 2018 20:24, aprekates wrote: In a new installed system with Debian 9.6 $ dpkg -l will list only packages with 'ii' state and a couple of 'rc'. But if i run: $ dpkg -l w* i will get a dozen also of 'un' packages. So i dont understand the logic of altering the output when i use a pattern . I would expect to see only 'ii' packages starting from the letter 'w' . Also i dont understand why in a new system dpkg would know anything about uninstalled packages! dpkg -l w* will be expanded by the shell (if there is any file starting with w in the current directory). Have you tried dpkg -l 'w*' Let's see: dpkg -l w* dpkg-query: no packages found matching webplot.txt It's important to keep in mind that if there are no files matching the wildcard expansion, the w* is passed as-is to the command. So if I create an empty directory, enter the directory, and snowball:525$ dpkg -l w* Desired=Unknown/Install/Remove/Purge/Hold | Status=Not/Inst/Conf-files/Unpacked/halF-conf/Half-inst/trig-aWait/Trig-pend |/ Err?=(none)/Reinst-required (Status,Err: uppercase=bad) ||/ Name Version Architecture Description +++----= un w-bassman (no descripti snowball:525$ touch w snowball:526$ dpkg -l w* dpkg-query: no packages found matching w Yes, the OP does want in general to escape the w* as 'w*' (or other methods), but his output is completely reasonable, especially in a fresh install
Re: Question on dpkg -l output.
Dan Ritter writes: > Eduardo M KALINOWSKI wrote: >> On 21 de dezembro de 2018 20:24, aprekates wrote: >> > In a new installed system with Debian 9.6 >> > >> > $ dpkg -l >> > >> > will list only packages with 'ii' state and a couple of 'rc'. >> > >> > But if i run: >> > >> > $ dpkg -l w* >> > >> > i will get a dozen also of 'un' packages. >> > >> > So i dont understand the logic of altering the output when >> > i use a pattern . I would expect to see only 'ii' packages starting >> > from the letter 'w' . >> > >> > Also i dont understand why in a new system dpkg would know >> > anything about uninstalled packages! >> >> dpkg -l w* >> will be expanded by the shell (if there is any file starting with w in the >> current directory). >> >> Have you tried >> dpkg -l 'w*' > > Let's see: > > dpkg -l w* > dpkg-query: no packages found matching webplot.txt It's important to keep in mind that if there are no files matching the wildcard expansion, the w* is passed as-is to the command. So if I create an empty directory, enter the directory, and snowball:525$ dpkg -l w* Desired=Unknown/Install/Remove/Purge/Hold | Status=Not/Inst/Conf-files/Unpacked/halF-conf/Half-inst/trig-aWait/Trig-pend |/ Err?=(none)/Reinst-required (Status,Err: uppercase=bad) ||/ Name Version Architecture Description +++----= un w-bassman (no descripti snowball:525$ touch w snowball:526$ dpkg -l w* dpkg-query: no packages found matching w Yes, the OP does want in general to escape the w* as 'w*' (or other methods), but his output is completely reasonable, especially in a fresh install
Re: Question on dpkg -l output.
Indeed some are virtual or pure virtual (although i dont know the diff) But also there are packages like 'ergo' which look normal and the only relation i think found (reason to display it) is because libstd++6 depends on it. Also listed packages like 'wink' not in the repos any more. On 22/12/18 2:18 π.μ., Oliver Schoede wrote: On Sat, 22 Dec 2018 01:10:34 +0200 aprekates wrote: In my case both: $ dpkg -l w* and $ dpkg -l 'w*' will report the same list Hi! I'm getting the same sort of output and it seems to me these are packages, dpkg knows about providing some virtual packages, that something else on your system depends upon, but which is already satisfied in other ways. This would for instance explain why I see w3m and chromium, although having had neither installed at any time: both provide www-browser, and something I have depends on it. Cheers
Re: Question on dpkg -l output.
On Sat, 22 Dec 2018 01:10:34 +0200 aprekates wrote: > In my case both: > > $ dpkg -l w* > > and > > $ dpkg -l 'w*' > > will report the same list > Hi! I'm getting the same sort of output and it seems to me these are packages, dpkg knows about providing some virtual packages, that something else on your system depends upon, but which is already satisfied in other ways. This would for instance explain why I see w3m and chromium, although having had neither installed at any time: both provide www-browser, and something I have depends on it. Cheers
Re: Question on dpkg -l output.
In my case both: $ dpkg -l w* and $ dpkg -l 'w*' will report the same list # dpkg -l w* Desired=Unknown/Install/Remove/Purge/Hold | Status=Not/Inst/Conf-files/Unpacked/halF-conf/Half-inst/trig-aWait/Trig-pend |/ Err?=(none)/Reinst-required (Status,Err: uppercase=bad) ||/ Name Version Architecture Description +++--===-===-= un w-bassman (no description available) un w3m (no description available) un wajig (no description available) ii wamerican 7.1-1 all American English dictionary words for /usr/share/dict un watch (no description available) un wbritish (no description available) un wdiff (no description available) un wesnoth-1.12-core (no description available) ii wget 1.18-5+deb9u2 amd64 retrieves files from the web un wget-ssl (no description available) ii whiptail 0.52.19-1+b1 amd64 Displays user-friendly dialog boxes from shell scripts un whiptail-utf8 (no description available) un whois (no description available) un widelands (no description available) un wink (no description available) un wordlist (no description available) un www-browser (no description available) On 22/12/18 1:07 π.μ., Dan Ritter wrote: Eduardo M KALINOWSKI wrote: On 21 de dezembro de 2018 20:24, aprekates wrote: In a new installed system with Debian 9.6 $ dpkg -l will list only packages with 'ii' state and a couple of 'rc'. But if i run: $ dpkg -l w* i will get a dozen also of 'un' packages. So i dont understand the logic of altering the output when i use a pattern . I would expect to see only 'ii' packages starting from the letter 'w' . Also i dont understand why in a new system dpkg would know anything about uninstalled packages! dpkg -l w* will be expanded by the shell (if there is any file starting with w in the current directory). Have you tried dpkg -l 'w*' Let's see: dpkg -l w* dpkg-query: no packages found matching webplot.txt dpkg -l 'w*' Desired=Unknown/Install/Remove/Purge/Hold | Status=Not/Inst/Conf-files/Unpacked/halF-conf/Half-inst/trig-aWait/Trig-pend |/ Err?=(none)/Reinst-required (Status,Err: uppercase=bad) ||/ Name Version Architecture Description +++-==---= un w-bassman(no description available) ii w3m0.5.3-34+deb amd64WWW browsable pager with excellen un w3m-el (no description available) un w3m-img (no description available) un w3m-ssl (no description available) un w3mmee (no description available) un wacom-tools (no description available) un wajig(no description available) ii wamerican 7.1-1all American English dictionary words un watch(no description available) un watchdog (no description available) un wbritish (no description available) un wdiff(no description available) -dsr-
Re: Question on dpkg -l output.
Eduardo M KALINOWSKI wrote: > On 21 de dezembro de 2018 20:24, aprekates wrote: > > In a new installed system with Debian 9.6 > > > > $ dpkg -l > > > > will list only packages with 'ii' state and a couple of 'rc'. > > > > But if i run: > > > > $ dpkg -l w* > > > > i will get a dozen also of 'un' packages. > > > > So i dont understand the logic of altering the output when > > i use a pattern . I would expect to see only 'ii' packages starting > > from the letter 'w' . > > > > Also i dont understand why in a new system dpkg would know > > anything about uninstalled packages! > > dpkg -l w* > will be expanded by the shell (if there is any file starting with w in the > current directory). > > Have you tried > dpkg -l 'w*' Let's see: dpkg -l w* dpkg-query: no packages found matching webplot.txt dpkg -l 'w*' Desired=Unknown/Install/Remove/Purge/Hold | Status=Not/Inst/Conf-files/Unpacked/halF-conf/Half-inst/trig-aWait/Trig-pend |/ Err?=(none)/Reinst-required (Status,Err: uppercase=bad) ||/ Name Version Architecture Description +++-==---= un w-bassman(no description available) ii w3m0.5.3-34+deb amd64WWW browsable pager with excellen un w3m-el (no description available) un w3m-img (no description available) un w3m-ssl (no description available) un w3mmee (no description available) un wacom-tools (no description available) un wajig(no description available) ii wamerican 7.1-1all American English dictionary words un watch(no description available) un watchdog (no description available) un wbritish (no description available) un wdiff(no description available) -dsr-
Re: Question on dpkg -l output.
On 21 de dezembro de 2018 20:24, aprekates wrote: > In a new installed system with Debian 9.6 > > $ dpkg -l > > will list only packages with 'ii' state and a couple of 'rc'. > > But if i run: > > $ dpkg -l w* > > i will get a dozen also of 'un' packages. > > So i dont understand the logic of altering the output when > i use a pattern . I would expect to see only 'ii' packages starting > from the letter 'w' . > > Also i dont understand why in a new system dpkg would know > anything about uninstalled packages! dpkg -l w* will be expanded by the shell (if there is any file starting with w in the current directory). Have you tried dpkg -l 'w*' ?
Question on dpkg -l output.
In a new installed system with Debian 9.6 $ dpkg -l will list only packages with 'ii' state and a couple of 'rc'. But if i run: $ dpkg -l w* i will get a dozen also of 'un' packages. So i dont understand the logic of altering the output when i use a pattern . I would expect to see only 'ii' packages starting from the letter 'w' . Also i dont understand why in a new system dpkg would know anything about uninstalled packages! alexandros
Re: prevent "dpkg -l" from showing nonexisting packages
On 3/13/17, Vincent Lefevre <vinc...@vinc17.net> wrote: > On 2017-03-13 00:23:54 -0400, kamaraju kusumanchi wrote: >> Let me rephrase my question. If "dpkg -l" cannot do it, is there some >> other command that will only show packages from the current >> repositories? > > Perhaps apt-show-versions, which can check whether a package > is in a repository. You will need options and/or grep. > > For instance, on one of my machines, I get in the output: > > unison2.40.102:amd64 2.40.102-3 installed: No available version in archive > > i.e. apt-show-versions detects that this package is installed, > but no longer in any declared repository. Ooohhh, NICE find! I never would have thought about it because I've never seen apt-show-versions produce that output. I started to write: Is there a way to perform maybe a "reverse" grep sent to a file that was an "apt-show-versions -u" (or any other) query with everything EXCEPT those packages that return "No available version in archive"? And then I went to "man grep" = THERE IS A WAY At least it worked on my end. I don't have anything that's not from that one-liner repository I use (in /etc/apt/sources.list) so I tried: apt-show-versions | grep -v "uptodate" -i That "-v" is interchangeable with "--invert-match". Both allow you to: "Invert the sense of matching, to select non-matching lines" Better yet, I just did: apt-show-versions | grep -v "uptodate" -i > notUpToDate20170313 THAT... returned ONLY the lines that did NOT contain "uptodate" out of the tons of packages I have installed AND then sent that query to a file that is easier FOR ME to read and manipulate (versus seeing it on the terminal display). I A-SUME but cannot test drive that the following MIGHT be usable for someone somewhere... some day: apt-show-versions | grep -v "No available version in archive" -i > thePackagesIwanted OR, depending on your need, maybe something like: apt-show-versions -u | grep -v "No available version in archive" -i > thePackagesIwanted Yes, no, maybe so? For those who have not seen the ">" yet, that was a tremendous tip I learned on the fly years ago. It outputs what you're doing to a file. There's a no-brainer "caveat" to using that. You must have rights to access the directory that you're issuing that command from, else it WILL fail. E.g. I can't issue that command while my terminal is showing that I'm sitting in the /etc directory. It DOES work if I change the file path to "~/notUpToDate20170313", e.g.: elf@northpole:/etc$ apt-show-versions | grep -v "uptodate" -i > ~/notUpToDate20170313 I say again... Oooo :) Cindy :) -- Cindy-Sue Causey Talking Rock, Pickens County, Georgia, USA * runs with duct tape *
Re: prevent "dpkg -l" from showing nonexisting packages
On 2017-03-13 00:23:54 -0400, kamaraju kusumanchi wrote: > On Sat, Mar 11, 2017 at 12:08 PM, Brian <a...@cityscape.co.uk> wrote: > > On Sat 11 Mar 2017 at 10:21:13 -0500, kamaraju kusumanchi wrote: > >> How to change this behaviour so > >> it only shows packages that are available in repositories? > > > > Impossible. 'dpkg -l' only shows packages which have files on the system. > > > > Perhaps you would like to reframe your query? > > Let me rephrase my question. If "dpkg -l" cannot do it, is there some > other command that will only show packages from the current > repositories? Perhaps apt-show-versions, which can check whether a package is in a repository. You will need options and/or grep. For instance, on one of my machines, I get in the output: unison2.40.102:amd64 2.40.102-3 installed: No available version in archive i.e. apt-show-versions detects that this package is installed, but no longer in any declared repository. AFAIK, aptitude can do similar things. > If "dpkg -l" only shows packages which files on the system, what files > should I remove, so that packages such as flashplayer-mozilla will not > show up in its output? "rc" means that the package has been removed but its conffiles are still there (i.e. the package has not been "purged"). You can get the list of remaining files with: dpkg -L You can purge the package (i.e. remove all the conffiles) with: dpkg -P > If there is no generic way of doing it, can I do it just for just > flashplayer-mozilla package? Note: There is a package that downloads the non-free Flash plugin. These files are not from the package, thus will not be detected by dpkg. If you have used it and purged the package, you should manually check that everything has been cleaned up (perhaps this package ensures that, though). -- Vincent Lefèvre <vinc...@vinc17.net> - Web: <https://www.vinc17.net/> 100% accessible validated (X)HTML - Blog: <https://www.vinc17.net/blog/> Work: CR INRIA - computer arithmetic / AriC project (LIP, ENS-Lyon)
Re: prevent "dpkg -l" from showing nonexisting packages
On Sat, Mar 11, 2017 at 12:08 PM, Brian <a...@cityscape.co.uk> wrote: > On Sat 11 Mar 2017 at 10:21:13 -0500, kamaraju kusumanchi wrote: > >> The output from "dpkg -l" is showing some packages that are not >> present in the repositories I track. > > You are referring to the repositories you track now. What about those > repositories you no longer track. (Does deb-multimedia ring any bells?) > You are right. I did add deb-multimedia at some point and then commented it out now. Those packages may be lying around in my system now. >> How to change this behaviour so >> it only shows packages that are available in repositories? > > Impossible. 'dpkg -l' only shows packages which have files on the system. > > Perhaps you would like to reframe your query? > Let me rephrase my question. If "dpkg -l" cannot do it, is there some other command that will only show packages from the current repositories? If "dpkg -l" only shows packages which files on the system, what files should I remove, so that packages such as flashplayer-mozilla will not show up in its output? If there is no generic way of doing it, can I do it just for just flashplayer-mozilla package? thanks raju -- Kamaraju S Kusumanchi | http://raju.shoutwiki.com/wiki/Blog
Re: prevent "dpkg -l" from showing nonexisting packages
On Sat 11 Mar 2017 at 10:21:13 -0500, kamaraju kusumanchi wrote: > The output from "dpkg -l" is showing some packages that are not > present in the repositories I track. You are referring to the repositories you track now. What about those repositories you no longer track. (Does deb-multimedia ring any bells?) > How to change this behaviour so > it only shows packages that are available in repositories? Impossible. 'dpkg -l' only shows packages which have files on the system. Perhaps you would like to reframe your query?
prevent "dpkg -l" from showing nonexisting packages
The output from "dpkg -l" is showing some packages that are not present in the repositories I track. How to change this behaviour so it only shows packages that are available in repositories? Consider for example % dpkg -l \*flash\* Desired=Unknown/Install/Remove/Purge/Hold | Status=Not/Inst/Conf-files/Unpacked/halF-conf/Half-inst/trig-aWait/Trig-pend |/ Err?=(none)/Reinst-required (Status,Err: uppercase=bad) ||/ Name Version ArchitectureDescription +++--===-===-== un flashplayer-mozilla (no description available) un flashplugin (no description available) rc flashplugin-nonfree 1:3.7 amd64 Adobe Flash Player - browser plugin un hal-flash(no description available) un libflash-mozplugin (no description available) which shows flashplayer-mozilla in the output. But that package does not exist in the repositories. % rmadison flashplayer-mozilla My repositories are % inxi -r Repos: Active apt sources in file: /etc/apt/sources.list deb http://httpredir.debian.org/debian/ stretch main contrib non-free deb-src http://httpredir.debian.org/debian/ stretch main contrib non-free deb http://httpredir.debian.org/debian/ stretch-updates main contrib non-free deb-src http://httpredir.debian.org/debian/ stretch-updates main contrib non-free deb http://security.debian.org/ stretch/updates main contrib non-free deb-src http://security.debian.org/ stretch/updates main contrib non-free deb http://debug.mirrors.debian.org/debian-debug/ stretch-debug main contrib non-free % uname -a Linux hogwarts 4.9.0-2-amd64 #1 SMP Debian 4.9.13-1 (2017-02-27) x86_64 GNU/Linux thanks raju -- Kamaraju S Kusumanchi | http://raju.shoutwiki.com/wiki/Blog
Re: what is ri in dpkg -l about?
On Sat, Nov 28, 2015 at 01:02:58PM +0100, alberto fuentes wrote: desired = remove, status = install I dont remember marking this packages in anyway, nor are they removed on a full-upgrade or autoremove. So what are these packages about? Luckily, "dpkg -l" gives you a nice header explaining what the three status columns mean: $ dpkg -l |grep -vE ^ii Desired=Unknown/Install/Remove/Purge/Hold | Status=Not/Inst/Conf-files/Unpacked/halF-conf/Half-inst/trig-aWait/Trig-pend |/ Err?=(none)/Reinst-required (Status,Err: uppercase=bad) ||/ Name Version ^^^ This is the header. Notice the ASCII art tracing the three lines of information to three columns? The first column is the desired state of the package. The second column is the ACTUAL status of the package. The third column indicates any errors. So, you're excluding all packages with state "ii", which are packages which you WANT installed and which ARE installed. Packages which are "ri" are package which you WANT to remove, but which ARE installed. In other words, dpkg (or apt, or some pther package manager) has marked the package for removable, but that removal hasn't happened yet. I imagine this could happen, for example, if a removal command was interrupted. You can also see any actions that dpkg thinks are pending by running "dpkg --audit". -- For more information, please reread. signature.asc Description: PGP signature
what is ri in dpkg -l about?
desired = remove, status = install I dont remember marking this packages in anyway, nor are they removed on a full-upgrade or autoremove. So what are these packages about? $ dpkg -l |grep -vE ^ii Desired=Unknown/Install/Remove/Purge/Hold | Status=Not/Inst/Conf-files/Unpacked/halF-conf/Half-inst/trig-aWait/Trig-pend |/ Err?=(none)/Reinst-required (Status,Err: uppercase=bad) ||/ Name Version Architecture Description +++-=-==-- ri fonts-lohit-knda 2.5.3-2 all Lohit TrueType font for Kannada Language ri gnome-video-arcade0.8.5-1 amd64Simple MAME frontend ri kde-runtime-dbg 4:15.08.2-1 amd64debugging symbols for KDE base runtime module ri kde-workspace-dbg 4:4.11.22-2 amd64debugging symbols for the KDE Plasma Workspaces ri kdelibs5-dbg 4:4.14.13-1 amd64debugging symbols for the KDE Development Platform libraries ri lib32tinfo5 6.0+20151024-2 amd64shared low-level terminfo library for terminal handling (32-bit) ri libboost-iostreams1.55.0:amd641.55.0+dfsg-4 amd64Boost.Iostreams Library ri libboost-regex1.55.0:amd641.55.0+dfsg-4 amd64regular expression library for C++ ri libcloog-ppl1:amd64 0.16.1-5+b1 amd64Chunky Loop Generator (runtime library) ri libgnome-desktop-2-17 2.32.1-2 amd64Utility library for loading .desktop files - runtime files ri libio-pty-easy-perl 0.09-1 all module providing an easy interface to IO::Pty ri libkimproxy4 4:4.14.13-1 amd64Instant Messaging Interface Library for the KDE Platform ri libkutils44:4.14.13-1 amd64dummy transitional library ri libppl-c4:amd64 1:1.1-7 amd64Parma Polyhedra Library (C interface) ri libppl13v5:amd64 1:1.1-7 amd64Parma Polyhedra Library (runtime library) ri libqt4-dbg:amd64 4:4.8.7+dfsg-3 amd64Qt 4 library debugging symbols ri libusb-1.0-0:i386 2:1.0.20-1 i386 userspace USB programming library ri libx86-1:i386 1.1+ds1-10 i386 x86 real-mode library ri libxp6:i386 1:1.0.2-2 i386 X Printing Extension (Xprint) client library ri linux-headers-4.1.0-2-common 4.1.6-1 amd64Common header files for Linux 4.1.0-2 ri mame 0.154-3.1 amd64Multiple Arcade Machine Emulator (MAME) ri mame-tools0.154-3.1 amd64Tools for MAME and MESS ri mess-data 0.154-3.1 all Data files for the Multi Emulator Super System (MESS) ri myrepos 1.20150503 all tool to manage all your version control repos ri network-manager-openvpn 1.0.6-3 amd64network management framework (OpenVPN plugin core) ri network-manager-pptp 1.0.6-1 amd64network management framework (PPTP plugin core) ri network-manager-vpnc 1.0.6-1 amd64network management framework (VPNC plugin core) ri openlugaru 0~20110520.1+hge4354+dfsg-4.1 amd64third-person rabbit action game ri python-backports.ssl-match-hostname 3.4.0.2-1 all Backport of the Python 3.2 SSL hostname checking function ri python-docker 1.5.0-1 all Python wrapper to access docker.io's control socket ri python-docopt 0.6.2-1 all command-line interface description language ri python-texttable 0.8.1-1 all Module for creating simple ASCII tables ri python-websocket 0.18.0-2 all WebSocket client library for Python
Re: mashup apt-cache search SearchTerm dpkg -l - HowTo? ; jor
On Sun, Jun 27, 2010 at 4:23 PM, giovanni_re john...@fastmail.us wrote:
Thanks Aaron Tom -
That's progress, but not there yet. ;)
Further suggestion? Thanks :)
You're welcome.
I assumed that you only wanted installed packages because I thought
that dpkg -l was meant for installed packages...
For all packages, run
aptitude -F %a%c %p %v %d search parted
(I have inverted the action and current states of my first post to use
dpkg -l's order)
Or, just with dpkg
dpkg -l *parted*
Or with apt-cache (using Aaron's post)
dpkg -l $(apt-cache search parted | awk '{print $2}' | tr '\n' ' ')
So you could also run, to get the same output as with dpkg -l
dpkg -l $(aptitude search -F %p parted | tr '\n' ' ')
I am not sure that tr ... is needed but I don't have a Debian box at
hand to check.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive:
http://lists.debian.org/aanlktilsyk-x6h_nlawu4m2abnbu0ii2jdf3f5ytf...@mail.gmail.com
Re: mashup apt-cache search SearchTerm dpkg -l - HowTo? ; jor
On Sat, Jun 26, 2010 at 7:57 PM, giovanni_re john...@fastmail.us wrote: Is there a way to mashup apt-cache search SearchTerm dpkg -l - so that given a SearchTerm, it would find all the related package names in the cache, then do a dpkg -l on those package names? No need for dpkg. aptitude -F %c%a %p %v %d search '?narrow(?installed,searchterm)' -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/aanlktikqfx5zwcqjgrucbrodkwc45coj-tk8278ru...@mail.gmail.com
Re: mashup apt-cache search SearchTerm dpkg -l - HowTo? ; jor
Thanks Aaron Tom -
That's progress, but not there yet. ;)
Further suggestion? Thanks :)
On Sun, 27 Jun 2010 04:39:41 -0400, Tom H tomh0...@gmail.com said:
On Sat, Jun 26, 2010 at 7:57 PM, giovanni_re john...@fastmail.us wrote:
Is there a way to mashup apt-cache search SearchTerm dpkg -l
- so that given a SearchTerm,
it would find all the related package names in the cache,
then do a dpkg -l on those package names?
No need for dpkg.
aptitude -F %c%a %p %v %d search '?narrow(?installed,searchterm)'
One key point is that the output should include every package returned
by
apt-cache search SearchTerm
show whether or not they are installed.
= Example showing the concept, using package parted:
1) First, here are all the packages apt-cache returns:
# apt-cache search parted | sort
drobo-utils - manage data robotics storage units (drobos)
fatresize - FAT16/FAT32 filesystem resizer
gnu-fdisk - Linux fdisk replacement based on libparted
gparted - GNOME partition editor
kvpm - LVM frontend for KDE
libparted0debian1-dbg - The GNU Parted disk partitioning library debug
development files
libparted0debian1 - The GNU Parted disk partitioning shared library
libparted0-dev - The GNU Parted disk partitioning library development
files
libparted0-i18n - The GNU Parted disk partitioning library i18n support
libparted0 - The GNU Parted disk partitioning shared library (old name)
parted-doc - The GNU Parted disk partition resizing program
documentation
parted - The GNU Parted disk partition resizing program
partitionmanager - A partition management utility
python-parted-dbg - Python interface for libparted - Debugging symbols
python-parted - Python interface for libparted
2) But dpkg -l only shows some of them:
dpkg -l | grep parted
ii gparted 0.5.1-1ubuntu2
GNOME partition editor
ii libparted0 2.2-5ubuntu5
The GNU Parted disk partitioning shared libr
ii libparted0debian12.2-5ubuntu5
The GNU Parted disk partitioning shared libr
ii parted 2.2-5ubuntu5
The GNU Parted disk partition resizing progr
{ For reference, here are 2 more dpkg -l searches:
dpkg -l parted
Desired=Unknown/Install/Remove/Purge/Hold
|
Status=Not/Inst/Cfg-files/Unpacked/Failed-cfg/Half-inst/trig-aWait/Trig-pend
|/ Err?=(none)/Reinst-required (Status,Err: uppercase=bad)
||/ Name Version
Description
+++-==-==-
ii parted 2.2-5ubuntu5
The GNU Parted disk partition resizing program
dpkg -l '*parted*'
Desired=Unknown/Install/Remove/Purge/Hold
|
Status=Not/Inst/Cfg-files/Unpacked/Failed-cfg/Half-inst/trig-aWait/Trig-pend
|/ Err?=(none)/Reinst-required (Status,Err: uppercase=bad)
||/ Name Version
Description
+++-==-==-
ii gparted0.5.1-1ubuntu2
GNOME partition editor
un libparted none
(no description available)
ii libparted0 2.2-5ubuntu5
The GNU Parted disk partitioning shared library (old name)
un libparted0-dev none
(no description available)
un libparted0-i18nnone
(no description available)
ii libparted0debian1 2.2-5ubuntu5
The GNU Parted disk partitioning shared library
un libparted1 none
(no description available)
un libparted1.4 none
(no description available)
un libparted2 none
(no description available)
un npartednone
(no description available)
ii parted 2.2-5ubuntu5
The GNU Parted disk partition resizing program
un parted-doc none
(no description available)
un parted1.6 none
(no description available)
}
3a) I'd like to get an output list including all the packages from step
1 above,
3b) Showing the package name, its installed status (ii, un, etc) like
from step 2.
Note: One way might be to:
1) Do the apt-cache search packagename
2) For each line
2a) Pull out
Re: mashup apt-cache search SearchTerm dpkg -l - HowTo? ; jor
Thanks Aaron Tom -
That's progress, but not there yet. ;)
Further suggestion? Thanks :)
On Sat, 26 Jun 2010 19:00:20 -0600, Aaron Toponce aaron.topo...@gmail.com
said:
On 6/26/2010 6:58 PM, Aaron Toponce wrote:
On 6/26/2010 6:55 PM, Aaron Toponce wrote:
On 6/26/2010 5:57 PM, giovanni_re wrote:
Is there a way to mashup apt-cache search SearchTerm dpkg -l
- so that given a SearchTerm,
it would find all the related package names in the cache,
then do a dpkg -l on those package names?
dpkg -l $(apt-search iceweasel|grep ^i|awk '{print $2}'|tr '\n' ' ')
Actually, looking at that command, I'm sure I could combine the grep,
awk and tr in a single awk command. This was just quick and dirty. Of
course, replace 'iceweasel' with the package(s) you are searching for.
And, I just noticed I used one of my apt aliases.
alias apt-search=aptitude search
: The good result here is that this shows the dpkg -l, which can show
uninstalled or failed match packages.
: But it doesn't yet get all the packages.
One key point is that the output should include every package returned by
apt-cache search SearchTerm
show whether or not they are installed.
= Example showing the concept, using package parted:
1) First, here are all the packages apt-cache returns:
# apt-cache search parted | sort
drobo-utils - manage data robotics storage units (drobos)
fatresize - FAT16/FAT32 filesystem resizer
gnu-fdisk - Linux fdisk replacement based on libparted
gparted - GNOME partition editor
kvpm - LVM frontend for KDE
libparted0debian1-dbg - The GNU Parted disk partitioning library debug
development files
libparted0debian1 - The GNU Parted disk partitioning shared library
libparted0-dev - The GNU Parted disk partitioning library development files
libparted0-i18n - The GNU Parted disk partitioning library i18n support
libparted0 - The GNU Parted disk partitioning shared library (old name)
parted-doc - The GNU Parted disk partition resizing program documentation
parted - The GNU Parted disk partition resizing program
partitionmanager - A partition management utility
python-parted-dbg - Python interface for libparted - Debugging symbols
python-parted - Python interface for libparted
2) But dpkg -l only shows some of them:
dpkg -l | grep parted
ii gparted 0.5.1-1ubuntu2
GNOME partition editor
ii libparted0 2.2-5ubuntu5
The GNU Parted disk partitioning shared libr
ii libparted0debian12.2-5ubuntu5
The GNU Parted disk partitioning shared libr
ii parted 2.2-5ubuntu5
The GNU Parted disk partition resizing progr
{ For reference, here are 2 more dpkg -l searches:
dpkg -l parted
Desired=Unknown/Install/Remove/Purge/Hold
| Status=Not/Inst/Cfg-files/Unpacked/Failed-cfg/Half-inst/trig-aWait/Trig-pend
|/ Err?=(none)/Reinst-required (Status,Err: uppercase=bad)
||/ Name Version
Description
+++-==-==-
ii parted 2.2-5ubuntu5 The
GNU Parted disk partition resizing program
dpkg -l '*parted*'
Desired=Unknown/Install/Remove/Purge/Hold
| Status=Not/Inst/Cfg-files/Unpacked/Failed-cfg/Half-inst/trig-aWait/Trig-pend
|/ Err?=(none)/Reinst-required (Status,Err: uppercase=bad)
||/ Name Version
Description
+++-==-==-
ii gparted0.5.1-1ubuntu2 GNOME
partition editor
un libparted none (no
description available)
ii libparted0 2.2-5ubuntu5 The
GNU Parted disk partitioning shared library (old name)
un libparted0-dev none (no
description available)
un libparted0-i18nnone (no
description available)
ii libparted0debian1 2.2-5ubuntu5 The
GNU Parted disk partitioning shared library
un libparted1 none (no
description available)
un libparted1.4 none (no
description available)
un libparted2 none (no
description available)
un npartednone (no
description available)
ii parted 2.2-5ubuntu5
Re: mashup apt-cache search SearchTerm dpkg -l - HowTo? ; jor
On Sun, 27 Jun 2010 13:27:14 -0700, giovanni_re john...@fastmail.us said: Note: One way might be to: 1) Do the apt-cache search packagename 2) For each line 2a) Pull out the package name 2b) Write an apt-cache search for that name only to a temp file Er, that should have been a dpkg -l command, like this: 2b) Write a dpkg -l command for that name only to a temp file 3) Do the dpkg -l 's from the file 3b) remove from the output all the dpkg heading info, leaving only the package status lines. Can you get that mashup? Thanks :) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1277671393.20079.1382141...@webmail.messagingengine.com
Re: mashup apt-cache search SearchTerm dpkg -l - HowTo? ; jor
2010/6/27 giovanni_re john...@fastmail.us: Is there a way to mashup apt-cache search SearchTerm dpkg -l - so that given a SearchTerm, it would find all the related package names in the cache, then do a dpkg -l on those package names? -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1277596671.10273.1382055...@webmail.messagingengine.com aptitude install SearchTerm? or aptitude install SearchTerm~ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/aanlktimtegs3potxbztfzkvynzbjmblhqs1omak5_...@mail.gmail.com
mashup apt-cache search SearchTerm dpkg -l - HowTo? ; jor
Is there a way to mashup apt-cache search SearchTerm dpkg -l - so that given a SearchTerm, it would find all the related package names in the cache, then do a dpkg -l on those package names? -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1277596671.10273.1382055...@webmail.messagingengine.com
Re: mashup apt-cache search SearchTerm dpkg -l - HowTo? ; jor
On 6/26/2010 5:57 PM, giovanni_re wrote:
Is there a way to mashup apt-cache search SearchTerm dpkg -l
- so that given a SearchTerm,
it would find all the related package names in the cache,
then do a dpkg -l on those package names?
dpkg -l $(apt-search iceweasel|grep ^i|awk '{print $2}'|tr '\n' ' ')
--
. O . O . O . . O O . . . O .
. . O . O O O . O . O O . . O
O O O . O . . O O O O . O O O
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: mashup apt-cache search SearchTerm dpkg -l - HowTo? ; jor
On 6/26/2010 6:55 PM, Aaron Toponce wrote:
On 6/26/2010 5:57 PM, giovanni_re wrote:
Is there a way to mashup apt-cache search SearchTerm dpkg -l
- so that given a SearchTerm,
it would find all the related package names in the cache,
then do a dpkg -l on those package names?
dpkg -l $(apt-search iceweasel|grep ^i|awk '{print $2}'|tr '\n' ' ')
Actually, looking at that command, I'm sure I could combine the grep,
awk and tr in a single awk command. This was just quick and dirty. Of
course, replace 'iceweasel' with the package(s) you are searching for.
--
. O . O . O . . O O . . . O .
. . O . O O O . O . O O . . O
O O O . O . . O O O O . O O O
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: mashup apt-cache search SearchTerm dpkg -l - HowTo? ; jor
On 6/26/2010 6:58 PM, Aaron Toponce wrote:
On 6/26/2010 6:55 PM, Aaron Toponce wrote:
On 6/26/2010 5:57 PM, giovanni_re wrote:
Is there a way to mashup apt-cache search SearchTerm dpkg -l
- so that given a SearchTerm,
it would find all the related package names in the cache,
then do a dpkg -l on those package names?
dpkg -l $(apt-search iceweasel|grep ^i|awk '{print $2}'|tr '\n' ' ')
Actually, looking at that command, I'm sure I could combine the grep,
awk and tr in a single awk command. This was just quick and dirty. Of
course, replace 'iceweasel' with the package(s) you are searching for.
And, I just noticed I used one of my apt aliases.
alias apt-search=aptitude search
Cheers!
--
. O . O . O . . O O . . . O .
. . O . O O O . O . O O . . O
O O O . O . . O O O O . O O O
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
dpkg -l output (was: how to put packages on hold -- permanently)
On Wed, Dec 30, 2009 at 04:13:43 -0600, Stan Hoeppner wrote: [...] I have no idea what the first three lines of the dpkg -l output below are trying to tell me. :/# dpkg -l postfix Desired=Unknown/Install/Remove/Purge/Hold | Status=Not/Inst/Cfg-files/Unpacked/Failed-cfg/Half-inst/trig-aWait/Trig-pend |/ Err?=(none)/Hold/Reinst-required/X=both-problems (Status,Err: uppercase=bad) ||/ NameVersion Description +++-===-===-== The header of the dpkg -l output tells you how to interpret the first three characters in the listing for each package. The pipes and slashes are meant as ascii art lines to indicate which position corresponds to which line in the legend; the uppercase letters in the legend tell you which character will be used as an abbreviation. In your example: ii postfix 2.5.5-1.1 High-performance mail transport agent ii means Desired=Install, Status=Installed, Error=none; this is the normal output for properly installed packages and easy to remember, but if you need to understand less common cases then it is helpful to have the legend included in the output. -- Regards,| Florian | -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
screen width of dpkg -l|grep package name
I am trying to determine how to get a complete list of installed packages using 'dpkg -l'. Here is my issue. If I use dpkg -l | grep cupsys I get this. Note that the package name is incomplete. I believe this is caused by the screen width getting set to 80 columns. ii cupsys 1.1.23-10sarge Common UNIX Printing System(tm) - server ii cupsys-driver- 4.2.7-10 Gimp-Print printer drivers for CUPS ii cupsys-driver- 4.2.7-10 Gimp-Print printer drivers for CUPS what I would like to do is get each line fully completed like it does when I use a specific package. Note that the package name is complete haddock:/var/lib/dpkg# dpkg -l cupsys-driver-gimpprint Desired=Unknown/Install/Remove/Purge/Hold | Status=Not/Installed/Config-files/Unpacked/Failed-config/Half-installed |/ Err?=(none)/Hold/Reinst-required/X=both-problems (Status,Err: uppercase=bad) ||/ NameVersion Description +++-===-===- == ii cupsys-driver-gimpprint 4.2.7-10 Gimp-Print printer drivers for CUPS haddock:/var/lib/dpkg# dpkg -l cupsys-driver-gimpprint-data Desired=Unknown/Install/Remove/Purge/Hold | Status=Not/Installed/Config-files/Unpacked/Failed-config/Half-installed |/ Err?=(none)/Hold/Reinst-required/X=both-problems (Status,Err: uppercase=bad) ||/ NameVersion Description +++-===-===- == ii cupsys-driver-gimpprint-data4.2.7-10 Gimp-Print printer drivers for CUPS Thanks Tony
Re: screen width of dpkg -l|grep package name
On 1/25/07, Tony Heal [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [snip] Here is my issue. If I use dpkg –l | grep cupsys I get this. Note that the package name is incomplete. I believe this is caused by the screen width getting set to 80 columns. ii cupsys 1.1.23-10sarge Common UNIX Printing System(tm) - server ii cupsys-driver- 4.2.7-10 Gimp-Print printer drivers for CUPS ii cupsys-driver- 4.2.7-10 Gimp-Print printer drivers for CUPS what I would like to do is get each line fully completed like it does when I use a specific package. Note that the package name is complete haddock:/var/lib/dpkg# dpkg -l cupsys-driver-gimpprint Desired=Unknown/Install/Remove/Purge/Hold | Status=Not/Installed/Config-files/Unpacked/Failed-config/Half-installed |/ Err?=(none)/Hold/Reinst-required/X=both-problems (Status,Err: uppercase=bad) ||/ NameVersion Description +++-===-===-== ii cupsys-driver-gimpprint 4.2.7-10 Gimp-Print printer drivers for CUPS haddock:/var/lib/dpkg# dpkg -l cupsys-driver-gimpprint-data Desired=Unknown/Install/Remove/Purge/Hold | Status=Not/Installed/Config-files/Unpacked/Failed-config/Half-installed |/ Err?=(none)/Hold/Reinst-required/X=both-problems (Status,Err: uppercase=bad) ||/ NameVersion Description +++-===-===-== ii cupsys-driver-gimpprint-data4.2.7-10 Gimp-Print printer drivers for CUPS Did you try COLUMNS=120 dpkg -l | grep ? Celejar
RE: screen width of dpkg -l|grep package name
No, I did not know about that. Neat trick. Thanks Tony -Original Message- From: celejar [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, January 25, 2007 11:35 AM To: debian-user@lists.debian.org Subject: Re: screen width of dpkg -l|grep package name On 1/25/07, Tony Heal [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [snip] Here is my issue. If I use dpkg -l | grep cupsys I get this. Note that the package name is incomplete. I believe this is caused by the screen width getting set to 80 columns. ii cupsys 1.1.23-10sarge Common UNIX Printing System(tm) - server ii cupsys-driver- 4.2.7-10 Gimp-Print printer drivers for CUPS ii cupsys-driver- 4.2.7-10 Gimp-Print printer drivers for CUPS what I would like to do is get each line fully completed like it does when I use a specific package. Note that the package name is complete haddock:/var/lib/dpkg# dpkg -l cupsys-driver-gimpprint Desired=Unknown/Install/Remove/Purge/Hold | Status=Not/Installed/Config-files/Unpacked/Failed-config/Half-installed |/ Err?=(none)/Hold/Reinst-required/X=both-problems (Status,Err: uppercase=bad) ||/ NameVersion Description +++-===-===- == ii cupsys-driver-gimpprint 4.2.7-10 Gimp-Print printer drivers for CUPS haddock:/var/lib/dpkg# dpkg -l cupsys-driver-gimpprint-data Desired=Unknown/Install/Remove/Purge/Hold | Status=Not/Installed/Config-files/Unpacked/Failed-config/Half-installed |/ Err?=(none)/Hold/Reinst-required/X=both-problems (Status,Err: uppercase=bad) ||/ NameVersion Description +++-===-===- == ii cupsys-driver-gimpprint-data4.2.7-10 Gimp-Print printer drivers for CUPS Did you try COLUMNS=120 dpkg -l | grep ? Celejar -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: rc aus dpkg -l entfernen
Am Montag 02 Oktober 2006 16:15 schrieb Sandro Frenzel: Hey Liste! Vor ca. einer Wocher war hier eine Diskussion darüber, dass aptitude beim entfernen keine config Dateien mitlöscht. Leider finde ich den entsprechende Thread nicht mehr wo [...] 2. Ein Einzeiler, der die rc Pakete aus dpkg löscht Und dafür weiß keiner Rat?
Re: rc aus dpkg -l entfernen
Hallo, Sandro Frenzel wrote: 2. Ein Einzeiler, der die rc Pakete aus dpkg löscht Und dafür weiß keiner Rat? $ dpkg -l | grep ^rc | cut -d\ -f 3 | while read pkg; do sudo dpkg --purge $pkg; done (Bitte erst mit 'echo' statt 'sudo' testen). hth, Wolf -- Büroschimpfwort des Tages: Faxbezwinger - Kollege, der ständig Papierstau verursacht. (Sven-Lukas Müller) -- Haeufig gestellte Fragen und Antworten (FAQ): http://www.de.debian.org/debian-user-german-FAQ/ Zum AUSTRAGEN schicken Sie eine Mail an [EMAIL PROTECTED] mit dem Subject unsubscribe. Probleme? Mail an [EMAIL PROTECTED] (engl)
Re: rc aus dpkg -l entfernen
On Tuesday 03 October 2006 12:29, Sandro Frenzel wrote:
Am Montag 02 Oktober 2006 16:15 schrieb Sandro Frenzel:
2. Ein Einzeiler, der die rc Pakete aus dpkg löscht
Und dafür weiß keiner Rat?
dpkg --purge $(dpkg -l |grep ^rc |awk '{print $2}')
Gruß, Andreas
Re: rc aus dpkg -l entfernen
Hi Sandro,
Sandro Frenzel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Am Montag 02 Oktober 2006 16:15 schrieb Sandro Frenzel:
Vor ca. einer Wocher war hier eine Diskussion darüber, dass
aptitude beim entfernen keine config Dateien mitlöscht.
Leider finde ich den entsprechende Thread nicht mehr wo
[...]
2. Ein Einzeiler, der die rc Pakete aus dpkg löscht
Und dafür weiß keiner Rat?
dpkg --purge `dpkg --get-selections | awk '/deinstall/ {print $1}'`
Gruß
Frank
--
Jeder Mensch bereitet uns auf irgend eine Art Vergnügen.
Der eine, wenn er ein Zimmer betritt,
der andere, wenn er es verlässt.
rc aus dpkg -l entfernen
Hey Liste! Vor ca. einer Wocher war hier eine Diskussion darüber, dass aptitude beim entfernen keine config Dateien mitlöscht. Leider finde ich den entsprechende Thread nicht mehr wo 1. Die entsprechende Zeile zur Configlöschung mit aptitude steht und 2. Ein Einzeiler, der die rc Pakete aus dpkg löscht Vielleicht kann mir ja jemand auf die Sprünge helfen :-). Tschau Sandro
Re: rc aus dpkg -l entfernen
On 02.10.06 16:15:25, Sandro Frenzel wrote: Hey Liste! Vor ca. einer Wocher war hier eine Diskussion darüber, dass aptitude beim entfernen keine config Dateien mitlöscht. Leider finde ich den entsprechende Thread nicht mehr wo 1. Die entsprechende Zeile zur Configlöschung mit aptitude steht [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~/KDE-work/qm_projects/qmaketestcat /etc/apt/apt.conf.d/90aptitude Aptitude::Purge-Unused true; Andreas -- Snow Day -- stay home. -- Haeufig gestellte Fragen und Antworten (FAQ): http://www.de.debian.org/debian-user-german-FAQ/ Zum AUSTRAGEN schicken Sie eine Mail an [EMAIL PROTECTED] mit dem Subject unsubscribe. Probleme? Mail an [EMAIL PROTECTED] (engl)
Re: rc aus dpkg -l entfernen
On Mon, Oct 02, 2006 at 02:48:04PM +0200, Andreas Pakulat wrote: [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~/KDE-work/qm_projects/qmaketestcat /etc/apt/apt.conf.d/90aptitude Aptitude::Purge-Unused true; Hm, danke. Aber mal eine Frage: Was macht er, wenn ein Paket durch ein anderes ersetzt wird, die Konfigurationsdateien aber gleich sind? Ich hatte früher cryptsetup-luks installiert, weil die Debian-Version noch keinen LUKS-Support hatte. Jetzt kann ich cryptsetup installieren, dazu würde cryptsetup-luks aber ge-purge-t werden, was doch auch /etc/crypttab entfernen würde. Dann würde das Update aber nicht funktionieren. Oder liege ich da falsch? Shade and sweet water! Stephan -- | Stephan SeitzE-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] | | PGP Public Keys: http://fsing.rootsland.net/~stse/pgp.html | signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: rc aus dpkg -l entfernen
On 02.10.06 15:21:24, Stephan Seitz wrote: On Mon, Oct 02, 2006 at 02:48:04PM +0200, Andreas Pakulat wrote: [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~/KDE-work/qm_projects/qmaketestcat /etc/apt/apt.conf.d/90aptitude Aptitude::Purge-Unused true; Hm, danke. Aber mal eine Frage: Was macht er, wenn ein Paket durch ein anderes ersetzt wird, die Konfigurationsdateien aber gleich sind? Ich hatte früher cryptsetup-luks installiert, weil die Debian-Version noch keinen LUKS-Support hatte. Jetzt kann ich cryptsetup installieren, dazu würde cryptsetup-luks aber ge-purge-t werden, was doch auch /etc/crypttab entfernen würde. Dann würde das Update aber nicht funktionieren. Oder liege ich da falsch? Hmm, gute Frage. Solch ein Fall tritt aber doch eher selten ein, meistens liefert das Ersatz-Programm ja doch eigene Konfigurationsdateien. Andreas -- What happened last night can happen again. -- Haeufig gestellte Fragen und Antworten (FAQ): http://www.de.debian.org/debian-user-german-FAQ/ Zum AUSTRAGEN schicken Sie eine Mail an [EMAIL PROTECTED] mit dem Subject unsubscribe. Probleme? Mail an [EMAIL PROTECTED] (engl)
Re: dpkg -l is not listing packages on a new Etch installation
On Mon, Jun 05, 2006 at 23:47:31 -0400, H.S. wrote: Hello, Today I reinstalled Etch on my machine. After upgrading and everything, I noticed that dpkg -l is not listing some of the packages which are not already installed. I was looking for vim for example, and dpkg -l vim did not list it. However apt-get -s install vim did find it and showed that it could be installed. What am I missing here? dpkg doesn't know about all packages that are available. From the man-page: dpkg is a tool to install, build, remove and manage Debian packages. The tool I use to find packages from the command line is apt-cache: % apt-cache search vim | wc -l 40 I can also recommend aptitude to manage packages. /M -- Magnus Therning (OpenPGP: 0xAB4DFBA4) [EMAIL PROTECTED] Jabber: [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://therning.org/magnus Software is not manufactured, it is something you write and publish. Keep Europe free from software patents, we do not want censorship by patent law on written works. Good powers of observation are frequently called cynicism by those that don't have them. pgpDh1TivybBO.pgp Description: PGP signature
dpkg -l is not listing packages on a new Etch installation
Hello, Today I reinstalled Etch on my machine. After upgrading and everything, I noticed that dpkg -l is not listing some of the packages which are not already installed. I was looking for vim for example, and dpkg -l vim did not list it. However apt-get -s install vim did find it and showed that it could be installed. What am I missing here? Oh, btw, the new installer is much improved. Good job Debian team! -HS -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: remove a package entry that has rc in the begining on dpkg -l
On 2/1/06, Alexander Schmehl [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: * Siju George [EMAIL PROTECTED] [060201 08:47]: I understand that the package below is not installed but the confiruration files remain Yes, that's correct. # dpkg -l |grep apache rc libapache2-mod 4.3.10-16 server-side, HTML-embedded scripting languag How do I purge the configuration files too and get this package out of dpkg listing? With dpkg --purge package_name. Thankyou so much Simo, magnus and Alexander for your inputs :-) Kind Regards Siju
Re: remove a package entry that has rc in the begining on dpkg -l
On Wed, Feb 01, 2006 at 01:17:31PM +0530, Siju George wrote: Hi all, I understand that the package below is not installed but the confiruration files remain # dpkg -l |grep apache rc libapache2-mod 4.3.10-16 server-side, HTML-embedded scripting languag How do I purge the configuration files too and get this package out of dpkg listing? Thankyou so much Kind Regards Siju Hi, When you remove a package, you can use the 'purge' option, so that also the configuration files are removed. sudo dpkg --purge libapache2-mod should do the trick. You can use purge option also with aptitude or apt-get, see the man pages for more details... HTH Simo -- :r ~/.signature signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: remove a package entry that has rc in the begining on dpkg -l
On Wed, Feb 01, 2006 at 01:17:31PM +0530, Siju George wrote: Hi all, I understand that the package below is not installed but the confiruration files remain # dpkg -l |grep apache rc libapache2-mod 4.3.10-16 server-side, HTML-embedded scripting languag How do I purge the configuration files too and get this package out of dpkg listing? # dpkg --purge libapache2-mod /M -- Magnus Therning(OpenPGP: 0xAB4DFBA4) [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://therning.org/magnus Software is not manufactured, it is something you write and publish. Keep Europe free from software patents, we do not want censorship by patent law on written works. Increasingly, people seem to misinterpret complexity as sophistication, which is baffling--the incomprehensible should cause suspicion rather than admiration. -- Niklaus Wirth pgpD8AhP0jywB.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: remove a package entry that has rc in the begining on dpkg -l
* Siju George [EMAIL PROTECTED] [060201 08:47]: I understand that the package below is not installed but the confiruration files remain Yes, that's correct. # dpkg -l |grep apache rc libapache2-mod 4.3.10-16 server-side, HTML-embedded scripting languag How do I purge the configuration files too and get this package out of dpkg listing? With dpkg --purge package_name. Thankyou so much You are welcome. Yours sincerely, Alexander -- http://learn.to/quote/ http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html signature.asc Description: Digital signature
remove a package entry that has rc in the begining on dpkg -l
Hi all, I understand that the package below is not installed but the confiruration files remain # dpkg -l |grep apache rc libapache2-mod 4.3.10-16 server-side, HTML-embedded scripting languag How do I purge the configuration files too and get this package out of dpkg listing? Thankyou so much Kind Regards Siju
Re: Status von Paket in dpkg -l
Hallo Claus, [Nur nochmal fürs Archiv] Claus Malter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Guten Morgen, ich habe vorhin meinen gcc Compiler vom System schmeissen wollen und zusätzlich wollte ich (fälschlicherweise) das Paket 'gcc-3.3-base' vom System schmeissen. Ich weiss nun, dass man das nicht tun sollte ;) Ein 'dpkg -l gcc*' zeigt mir nun aber: pi gcc-3.3-base 3.3.5-13 The GNU Compiler Collection (base package) Das Flag p steht ja wohl für purged und i für installed. p steht genauer gesagt dafür, dass das Paket gelöscht _werden soll_. Getan ist es noch nicht. Du kannst diesen Wunsch mit echo gcc-3.3-base install | dpkg --set-selections ändern. Schöne Grüße, Jörg. -- Die NASA brauchte 12 Jahre um einen Kugelschreiber zu entwickeln, der kopfüber, in der Schwerelosigkeit und unter Wasser schreiben kann. Die Russen benutzten einfach einen Bleistift... -- Haeufig gestellte Fragen und Antworten (FAQ): http://www.de.debian.org/debian-user-german-FAQ/ Zum AUSTRAGEN schicken Sie eine Mail an [EMAIL PROTECTED] mit dem Subject unsubscribe. Probleme? Mail an [EMAIL PROTECTED] (engl)
Re: Status von Paket in dpkg -l
Hallo Christian, danke für die Antwort. Christian Frommeyer wrote: gerne meinen Versuch rückgängig machen und 'dpkg -l' soll mir wieder als Status 'ii' anzeigen. Wie mache ich das? In 'man dpkg' fand ich nichts. Schau Dir mal Aptitude an. Damit ist die Paketverwaltung i. A. wesentlich komfortabler als direkt mit dpkg. Ich arbeite dann doch lieber mit apt und dpkg. Da weiss ich was ich tue =) Ich habe mein Problem jetzt mittels 'apt-get install --reinstall' gelöst. Ob das nun sauber ist, weiss ich nicht. Gruß Chris Claus -- Haeufig gestellte Fragen und Antworten (FAQ): http://www.de.debian.org/debian-user-german-FAQ/ Zum AUSTRAGEN schicken Sie eine Mail an [EMAIL PROTECTED] mit dem Subject unsubscribe. Probleme? Mail an [EMAIL PROTECTED] (engl)
Re: Status von Paket in dpkg -l
Claus Malter: Ich habe mein Problem jetzt mittels 'apt-get install --reinstall' gelöst. Ob das nun sauber ist, weiss ich nicht. Ist es. Die Ausgabe von dpkg bedeutete übrigens soll deinstalliert werden, ist aktuell installiert: Desired=Unknown/Install/Remove/Purge/Hold | Status=Not/Installed/Config-files/Unpacked/Failed-config/Half-installed |/ Err?=(none)/Hold/Reinst-required/X=both-problems (Status,Err: uppercase=bad) ||/ Name Version Description +++--- ii gcc 4.0.2-2 The GNU C compiler Das erste Zeichen ist der Legende nach der erwünschte Status (desired), das Zweite der tatsächliche und das Dritte zeigt Fehler an. J. -- My medicine shelf is my altar. [Agree] [Disagree] http://www.slowlydownward.com/NODATA/data_enter2.html signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Status von Paket in dpkg -l
Guten Morgen, ich habe vorhin meinen gcc Compiler vom System schmeissen wollen und zusätzlich wollte ich (fälschlicherweise) das Paket 'gcc-3.3-base' vom System schmeissen. Ich weiss nun, dass man das nicht tun sollte ;) Ein 'dpkg -l gcc*' zeigt mir nun aber: pi gcc-3.3-base 3.3.5-13 The GNU Compiler Collection (base package) Das Flag p steht ja wohl für purged und i für installed. Sprich ein Purge konnte wegen Abhängigkeiten nicht erledigt werden? Ich würde gerne meinen Versuch rückgängig machen und 'dpkg -l' soll mir wieder als Status 'ii' anzeigen. Wie mache ich das? In 'man dpkg' fand ich nichts. Danke. Claus -- Haeufig gestellte Fragen und Antworten (FAQ): http://www.de.debian.org/debian-user-german-FAQ/ Zum AUSTRAGEN schicken Sie eine Mail an [EMAIL PROTECTED] mit dem Subject unsubscribe. Probleme? Mail an [EMAIL PROTECTED] (engl)
Re: Status von Paket in dpkg -l
gerne meinen Versuch rückgängig machen und 'dpkg -l' soll mir wieder als Status 'ii' anzeigen. Wie mache ich das? In 'man dpkg' fand ich nichts. Schau Dir mal Aptitude an. Damit ist die Paketverwaltung i. A. wesentlich komfortabler als direkt mit dpkg. Gruß Chris -- A: because it distrupts the normal process of thought Q: why is top posting frowned upon
dpkg -l lista de la primera columna ¿significado? thanks
Hola a todos , he estado desinstalando unas imágenes del kernel y varios paquetes que ya no uso con : apt-get remove paquete1 paquete2 etcetera y todo ha salido correctamente excepto un kernel que compile he instale yo a mano el cual no desaparece del listado dpkg -l aunque la desinstalación ha sido correcta , cuando vuelvo a intentar desinstalarlo apt me dice que no esta en el sistema en cambio el listado de dpkg -l me lanza lo siguiente (respecto a dicho paquete): rc kernel-image-2.6.8.291104 10.00.Custom En la primera columna rc , cuando en el resto de paquetes es ii he buscado en man dpkg y no he sabido encontrar la explicación de que es la primera columna , deduzco que ii sera instalado pero rc solo se me ocurre ráscame el coño y creo que no debe de ser eso, agradezco por adelantado la ayuda, un saludo.
Re: dpkg -l lista de la primera columna ¿signif icado? thanks
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 [EMAIL PROTECTED] escribió: Hola a todos , he estado desinstalando unas imágenes del kernel y varios paquetes que ya no uso con : apt-get remove paquete1 paquete2 etcetera y todo ha salido correctamente excepto un kernel que compile he instale yo a mano el cual no desaparece del listado dpkg -l aunque la desinstalación ha sido correcta , cuando vuelvo a intentar desinstalarlo apt me dice que no esta en el sistema en cambio el listado de dpkg -l me lanza lo siguiente (respecto a dicho paquete): rc kernel-image-2.6.8.291104 10.00.Custom En la primera columna rc , cuando en el resto de paquetes es ii he buscado en man dpkg y no he sabido encontrar la explicación de que es la primera columna , deduzco que ii sera instalado pero rc solo se me ocurre ráscame el coño y creo que no debe de ser eso, agradezco por adelantado la ayuda, un saludo. el mismo comando te lo dice en la cabecera: Desired=Unknown/Install/Remove/Purge/Hold | Estado=No/Instalado/Config-files/Unpacked/Failed-config/Half-installed |/ Err?=(none)/Hold/Reinst-required/X=both-problems (Status,Err: mayúsc.=malo) ||/ NombreVersión Descripción +++-=-=-== ii apache2 2.0.54-4 next generation, scalable, extendable web server apt-get --purge remove paquete1 paquete2 etcetera Eduardo -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFDCxng4oL0c+I9bb4RArpPAKCdePOiAL5LFbUGScxh5EhqiKrYUQCfQyRa kcv2+UYl8nByjuBhbk1gwsk= =5Avp -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: dpkg -l lista de la primera columna ¿significado? thanks
El mar, 23-08-2005 a las 14:28 +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] escribió: Hola a todos , he estado desinstalando unas imágenes del kernel y varios paquetes que ya no uso con : apt-get remove paquete1 paquete2 etcetera y todo ha salido correctamente excepto un kernel que compile he instale yo a mano el cual no desaparece del listado dpkg -l aunque la desinstalación ha sido correcta , cuando vuelvo a intentar desinstalarlo apt me dice que no esta en el sistema en cambio el listado de dpkg -l me lanza lo siguiente (respecto a dicho paquete): rc kernel-image-2.6.8.291104 10.00.Custom El mismo dpkg -l te lo dice: Desired=Unknown/Install/Remove/Purge/Hold | Estado=No/Instalado/Config-files/Unpacked/Failed-config/Half-installed |/ Err?=(none)/Hold/Reinst-required/X=both-problems (Status,Err: mayúsc.=malo) ||/ Nombre Versión Descripción +++-==-===- un kernel-doc-2.6 ninguna (no hay ninguna descripción disponible) Si te fijas en las | / / podrás ver que cada columna se refiere a las 3 filas de arriba |/ ||/ xxx rc= Remove + Config Files Cuando lo desintalaste no pusiste purge prueba apt-get remove --purge Saludos En la primera columna rc , cuando en el resto de paquetes es ii he buscado en man dpkg y no he sabido encontrar la explicación de que es la primera columna , deduzco que ii sera instalado pero rc solo se me ocurre ráscame el coño y creo que no debe de ser eso, agradezco por adelantado la ayuda, un saludo. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: dpkg -l lista de la primera columna ¿significado? thanks
Pero una vez ya a sido desinstalado el paquete ya no te deja hacer purge : # apt-get remove --purge kernel-image-2.6.8.291104 Leyendo lista de paquetes... Hecho Creando árbol de dependencias... Hecho El paquete kernel-image-2.6.8.291104 no esta instalado, no se eliminará 0 actualizados, 0 se instalarán, 0 para eliminar y 0 no actualizados. En cambio el dpkg me sigue mostrando que estan hay los ficheros de configuracion , tambien lo he probado con force y el resultado es el mismo. Un saludo. El Martes, 23 de Agosto de 2005 14:45, mario escribió: El mar, 23-08-2005 a las 14:28 +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] escribió: Hola a todos , he estado desinstalando unas imágenes del kernel y varios paquetes que ya no uso con : apt-get remove paquete1 paquete2 etcetera y todo ha salido correctamente excepto un kernel que compile he instale yo a mano el cual no desaparece del listado dpkg -l aunque la desinstalación ha sido correcta , cuando vuelvo a intentar desinstalarlo apt me dice que no esta en el sistema en cambio el listado de dpkg -l me lanza lo siguiente (respecto a dicho paquete): rc kernel-image-2.6.8.291104 10.00.Custom El mismo dpkg -l te lo dice: Desired=Unknown/Install/Remove/Purge/Hold | Estado=No/Instalado/Config-files/Unpacked/Failed-config/Half-installed |/ Err?=(none)/Hold/Reinst-required/X=both-problems (Status,Err: mayúsc.=malo) ||/ Nombre Versión Descripción +++-==-===- un kernel-doc-2.6 ninguna (no hay ninguna descripción disponible) Si te fijas en las | / / podrás ver que cada columna se refiere a las 3 filas de arriba |/ | ||/ xxx rc= Remove + Config Files Cuando lo desintalaste no pusiste purge prueba apt-get remove --purge Saludos En la primera columna rc , cuando en el resto de paquetes es ii he buscado en man dpkg y no he sabido encontrar la explicación de que es la primera columna , deduzco que ii sera instalado pero rc solo se me ocurre ráscame el coño y creo que no debe de ser eso, agradezco por adelantado la ayuda, un saludo. -- Este mensaje se dirige exclusivamente a su destinatario y puede contener información privilegiada o confidencial. Si no es vd. el destinatario indicado, queda notificado de que la utilización, divulgación y/o copia sin autorización está prohibida en virtud de la legislación vigente. Si ha recibido este mensaje por error, le rogamos que nos lo comunique inmediatamente por esta misma vía y proceda a su destrucción. This message is intended exclusively for its addressee and may contain information that is CONFIDENTIAL and protected by professional privilege. If you are not the intended recipient you are hereby notified that any dissemination, copy or disclosure of this communication is strictly prohibited by law. If this message has been received in error, please immediately notify us via e-mail and delete it.
Re: dpkg -l lista de la primera columna ¿significado? thanks
El mar, 23-08-2005 a las 15:03 +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] escribió: Pero una vez ya a sido desinstalado el paquete ya no te deja hacer purge : # apt-get remove --purge kernel-image-2.6.8.291104 Leyendo lista de paquetes... Hecho Creando árbol de dependencias... Hecho El paquete kernel-image-2.6.8.291104 no esta instalado, no se eliminará 0 actualizados, 0 se instalarán, 0 para eliminar y 0 no actualizados. Quizás no has probado bien: # dpkg -l |grep ^rc (esto da todos los paquetes que tienen configuración residual) rc libtiffxx0 3.7.2-3 Tag Image File Format (TIFF) library -- C++ # dpkg --purge libtiffxx0 (Leyendo la base de datos ... 187163 ficheros y directorios instalados actualmente.) Desinstalando libtiffxx0 ... Purgando ficheros de configuración de libtiffxx0 ... usa dpkg --purge Saludos En cambio el dpkg me sigue mostrando que estan hay los ficheros de configuracion , tambien lo he probado con force y el resultado es el mismo. Un saludo. El Martes, 23 de Agosto de 2005 14:45, mario escribió: El mar, 23-08-2005 a las 14:28 +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] escribió: Hola a todos , he estado desinstalando unas imágenes del kernel y varios paquetes que ya no uso con : apt-get remove paquete1 paquete2 etcetera y todo ha salido correctamente excepto un kernel que compile he instale yo a mano el cual no desaparece del listado dpkg -l aunque la desinstalación ha sido correcta , cuando vuelvo a intentar desinstalarlo apt me dice que no esta en el sistema en cambio el listado de dpkg -l me lanza lo siguiente (respecto a dicho paquete): rc kernel-image-2.6.8.291104 10.00.Custom El mismo dpkg -l te lo dice: Desired=Unknown/Install/Remove/Purge/Hold | Estado=No/Instalado/Config-files/Unpacked/Failed-config/Half-installed |/ Err?=(none)/Hold/Reinst-required/X=both-problems (Status,Err: mayúsc.=malo) ||/ Nombre Versión Descripción +++-==-===- un kernel-doc-2.6 ninguna (no hay ninguna descripción disponible) Si te fijas en las | / / podrás ver que cada columna se refiere a las 3 filas de arriba |/ | ||/ xxx rc= Remove + Config Files Cuando lo desintalaste no pusiste purge prueba apt-get remove --purge Saludos En la primera columna rc , cuando en el resto de paquetes es ii he buscado en man dpkg y no he sabido encontrar la explicación de que es la primera columna , deduzco que ii sera instalado pero rc solo se me ocurre ráscame el coño y creo que no debe de ser eso, agradezco por adelantado la ayuda, un saludo. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
dpkg -l / truncation of names
Hi,
I would like to save the names of all the installed packages.
# dpkg -l | awk '{print $2}'
Does the work, but some packages with long names are name truncated.
What's the option to provide to display the full name?
Thank you.
--
Administration Formation à l'administration
de serveurs dédiés:
http://www.google.fr/search?q=aspo+infogerance+serveur
Re: dpkg -l / truncation of names
On Mon, Aug 22, 2005 at 03:37:50PM +0200, Rakotomandimby Mihamina wrote:
Hi,
I would like to save the names of all the installed packages.
# dpkg -l | awk '{print $2}'
Does the work, but some packages with long names are name truncated.
What's the option to provide to display the full name?
What I use is:
# COLUMNS=120 dpkg -l | awk '{print $2}'
--
Martyrdom has always been a proof of the intensity, never of the correctness
of a belief. -- Arthur Schnitzler
Rick Pasotto[EMAIL PROTECTED]http://www.niof.net
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: dpkg -l / truncation of names
Rakotomandimby Mihamina wrote:
I would like to save the names of all the installed packages.
# dpkg -l | awk '{print $2}'
Does the work, but some packages with long names are name truncated.
What's the option to provide to display the full name?
a) You may try to call dpkg -l with COLUMNS set to more than 80.
# COLUMNS=120 dpkg -l | awk '{ print $2 }'
See 'man +/COLUMNS dpkg'.
b) You can also get the list of installed packages via
# dpkg --get-selections | awk '{ print $1 }'
- sebastian
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: dpkg -l / truncation of names
Sebastian Kayser wrote:
Rakotomandimby Mihamina wrote:
I would like to save the names of all the installed packages.
# dpkg -l | awk '{print $2}'
Does the work, but some packages with long names are name truncated.
What's the option to provide to display the full name?
a) You may try to call dpkg -l with COLUMNS set to more than 80.
# COLUMNS=120 dpkg -l | awk '{ print $2 }'
See 'man +/COLUMNS dpkg'.
b) You can also get the list of installed packages via
# dpkg --get-selections | awk '{ print $1 }'
- sebastian
Or use the following to print just the installed packages otherwise all
packages including deinstall are printed:
dpkg --get-selections | awk '{ if($2 ==install) print $1 }'
--
Carl
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: dpkg -l
Christoph Marcel Hilberg [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hallo Liste, beim Befehl dpkg -l werden alle Packete in einer tabellenförmigen Ausgabe aufgelistet. Leider werden die Packetnamen gekürzt wie zB bei wwwconfig-comm fehlt das on Gibt es eine weitere Option um diesen Fehler zu vermeiden? Bei neueren dpkg's geht auch dpkg|cat. Jörg. -- Computer games don't affect kids. If Pacman would have affected us as children, we would now run around in darkened rooms, munching pills and listening to repetetive music. -- Haeufig gestellte Fragen und Antworten (FAQ): http://www.de.debian.org/debian-user-german-FAQ/ Zum AUSTRAGEN schicken Sie eine Mail an [EMAIL PROTECTED] mit dem Subject unsubscribe. Probleme? Mail an [EMAIL PROTECTED] (engl)
dpkg -l
Hallo Liste, beim Befehl dpkg -l werden alle Packete in einer tabellenförmigen Ausgabe aufgelistet. Leider werden die Packetnamen gekürzt wie zB bei wwwconfig-comm fehlt das on Gibt es eine weitere Option um diesen Fehler zu vermeiden? c-toph -- best regards Schoene Gruesse Christoph Marcel Hilberg -- Haeufig gestellte Fragen und Antworten (FAQ): http://www.de.debian.org/debian-user-german-FAQ/ Zum AUSTRAGEN schicken Sie eine Mail an [EMAIL PROTECTED] mit dem Subject unsubscribe. Probleme? Mail an [EMAIL PROTECTED] (engl)
Re: dpkg -l
Am Tue, 05 Jul 2005 18:33:00 +0200 schrieb Christoph Marcel Hilberg [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Hallo Liste, beim Befehl dpkg -l werden alle Packete in einer tabellenförmigen Ausgabe aufgelistet. Leider werden die Packetnamen gekürzt wie zB bei wwwconfig-comm fehlt das on Gibt es eine weitere Option um diesen Fehler zu vermeiden? COLUMNS=200 dpkg -l c-toph -- Haeufig gestellte Fragen und Antworten (FAQ): http://www.de.debian.org/debian-user-german-FAQ/ Zum AUSTRAGEN schicken Sie eine Mail an [EMAIL PROTECTED] mit dem Subject unsubscribe. Probleme? Mail an [EMAIL PROTECTED] (engl)
Re: dpkg -l
beim Befehl dpkg -l werden alle Packete in einer tabellenf?rmigen Ausgabe aufgelistet. Leider werden die Packetnamen gek?rzt wie zB bei wwwconfig-comm fehlt das on Gibt es eine weitere Option um diesen Fehler zu vermeiden? dpkg --get-selections zeigt Dir immer alles an. (Oder aber das mit COLUMNS=200 dpkg -l, wie Malte schon schrieb). Fuer Skripte wuerde ich aber set-selections bevorzugen. -- MfG Jens
Re: dpkg -l
* Jens Ruehmkorf [EMAIL PROTECTED]: beim Befehl dpkg -l werden alle Packete in einer tabellenförmigen Ausgabe aufgelistet. Leider werden die Packetnamen gekürzt wie zB bei wwwconfig-comm fehlt das on Gibt es eine weitere Option um diesen Fehler zu vermeiden? dpkg --get-selections zeigt Dir immer alles an. (Oder aber das mit COLUMNS=200 dpkg -l, wie Malte schon schrieb). Fuer Skripte wuerde ich aber set-selections bevorzugen. s/set/get/ oder? grüße Stefan -- Haeufig gestellte Fragen und Antworten (FAQ): http://www.de.debian.org/debian-user-german-FAQ/ Zum AUSTRAGEN schicken Sie eine Mail an [EMAIL PROTECTED] mit dem Subject unsubscribe. Probleme? Mail an [EMAIL PROTECTED] (engl)
Re: dpkg -l
On Tue, 5 Jul 2005, Stefan Muthers wrote: * Jens Ruehmkorf [EMAIL PROTECTED]: dpkg --get-selections zeigt Dir immer alles an. (Oder aber das mit COLUMNS=200 dpkg -l, wie Malte schon schrieb). Fuer Skripte wuerde ich aber set-selections bevorzugen. s/set/get/ oder? Natuerlich ;) Danke. -- MfG Jens -- Haeufig gestellte Fragen und Antworten (FAQ): http://www.de.debian.org/debian-user-german-FAQ/ Zum AUSTRAGEN schicken Sie eine Mail an [EMAIL PROTECTED] mit dem Subject unsubscribe. Probleme? Mail an [EMAIL PROTECTED] (engl)
dpkg -l question
Hello, I see that when I run # dpkg -l I get a nice listing of installed packages, but if I pipe that command into less or more or even grep whatever, then the listing gets scrunched up, and it cuts off the end of packages with longer names. Is there a way to display it to show the long name? or is there a better way to get a partial dpkg -l listing? Thanks! cheers, Mike --- Sent via IMP -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: dpkg -l question
Quoting [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Hello, I see that when I run # dpkg -l I get a nice listing of installed packages, but if I pipe that command into less or more or even grep whatever, then the listing gets scrunched up, and it cuts off the end of packages with longer names. Is there a way to display it to show the long name? or is there a better way to get a partial dpkg -l listing? ah yes, man dpkg showed dpkg --get-selections That should work nicely, Cheers, Mike --- Sent via IMP -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: dpkg -l question
On Wed, Jun 29, 2005 at 09:20:55PM -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hello, I see that when I run # dpkg -l I get a nice listing of installed packages, but if I pipe that command into less or more or even grep whatever, then the listing gets scrunched up, and it cuts off the end of packages with longer names. Is there a way to display it to show the long name? or is there a better way to get a partial dpkg -l listing? COLUMNS=256 dpkg -l -- Tonight you will pay the wages of sin; Don't forget to leave a tip. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: dpkg -l qui oublie des paquets ?
C'est dingue ce que vous me dites tous. Selon vous, dpkg -l ne liste que les paquets qui sont ou ont étés installés ? Moi je pensais qu'il les listait tous... Et d'ailleurs : dpkg -l rubybook me liste bien rubybook - et je vous jure que j'ai jamais installé ca. Alors à mon avis le fonctionnement de dpkg -l n'est pas si simple... Et la manpage laisse à désirer sur ce point.
Re: dpkg -l qui oublie des paquets ?
dpkg -l rubybook ou dpkg -L rubybook ? georges rixed wrote: C'est dingue ce que vous me dites tous. Selon vous, dpkg -l ne liste que les paquets qui sont ou ont étés installés ? Moi je pensais qu'il les listait tous... Et d'ailleurs : dpkg -l rubybook me liste bien rubybook - et je vous jure que j'ai jamais installé ca. Alors à mon avis le fonctionnement de dpkg -l n'est pas si simple... Et la manpage laisse à désirer sur ce point.
Re: dpkg -l qui oublie des paquets ?
bonjour, Le vendredi 17 décembre 2004, rixed a écrit... Alors à mon avis le fonctionnement de dpkg -l n'est pas si simple... Et la manpage laisse à désirer sur ce point. man dpkg-query -- jm
Re: dpkg -l qui oublie des paquets ?
Jean-Michel OLTRA wrote: man dpkg-query OK, on y apprend qu'il va chercher ses infos dans /var/lib/dpkg/status. Bon, d'où ma seconde question : comment un paquet se retrouve là dedans ? Pourquoi chez moi libflash-mozilla n'y ait pas alors que rubybook s'y trouve, vu que je n'ai jamais installé l'un ni l'autre ? Une histoire de dépendances ?
Re: dpkg -l qui oublie des paquets ?
Georges Roux wrote: dpkg -l rubybook ou dpkg -L rubybook -l bien sur
Re: dpkg -l qui oublie des paquets ?
On 2004-12-17 08:42:45 +0100, rixed wrote: dpkg -l rubybook me liste bien rubybook - et je vous jure que j'ai jamais installé ca. Il a peut-être été installé sans que tu t'en aperçoives. -- Vincent Lefèvre [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Web: http://www.vinc17.org/ 100% accessible validated (X)HTML - Blog: http://www.vinc17.org/blog/ Work: CR INRIA - computer arithmetic / SPACES project at LORIA
Re: dpkg -l qui oublie des paquets ?
On 2004-12-17 09:34:17 +0100, rixed wrote: Bon, d'où ma seconde question : comment un paquet se retrouve là dedans ? Pourquoi chez moi libflash-mozilla n'y ait pas alors que rubybook s'y trouve, vu que je n'ai jamais installé l'un ni l'autre ? Une histoire de dépendances ? Pour rubybook, je ne pense pas. Mais il a peut-être été installé plus ou moins automatiquement lors que tu as installé Debian. Je vais prendre un exemple. Lors de ma première installation Debian, j'avais demandé à ce que les paquets relatifs à PPP soient installés, car je voulais pouvoir me connecter par une connexion RTC classique. Et bien cela m'a aussi installé les paquets pour RNIS! Non seulement ça, mais juste après l'installation, le système essayait de se connecter automatiquement par RNIS, coupant par la même occasion ma connexion Ethernet! -- Vincent Lefèvre [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Web: http://www.vinc17.org/ 100% accessible validated (X)HTML - Blog: http://www.vinc17.org/blog/ Work: CR INRIA - computer arithmetic / SPACES project at LORIA
Re: dpkg -l qui oublie des paquets ?
Vincent Lefevre [EMAIL PROTECTED] a écrit : | On 2004-12-16 15:31:37 +0100, rixed wrote: | Si je tappes dpkg -l 'libflash-*' il ne me liste que | libflash-dev. | | dpkg -l ne liste que ce qui est installé ou bien a été installé dans | le passé mais pas complètement enlevé. Je seconde rixed dans sa question. J'ai exactement les memes resultats que lui que ce soit pour libflash-* ou rubybook. Je ne pense pas que dpkg se limite aux paquets qui ont ete installes : il y a une difference entre pn ou rc (resp. paquet purge ou desinstalle) et le un (paquet jamais installe) : Desired=Unknown/Install/Remove/Purge/Hold | Status=Not/Installed/Config-files/Unpacked/Failed-config/Half-installed |/ Err?=(none)/Hold/Reinst-required/X=both-problems (Status,Err: uppercase=bad) ||/ Name Version Description +++-=-=-=== un libflash-dev none(no description available) un libflash0 none(no description available) [ou] pn xprt none(no description available) pn xprt-common none(no description available) pn xscavengernone(no description available) [ou] rc gimp1.2 1.2.3-2.4 The GNU Image Manipulation... rc mozilla-xft 1.6-5 Mozilla Web Browser - Xft... rc rox 2.0.1-0kv0a simple graphical file ma... Je remarque aussi que $ dpkg -l * renvoie considerablement plus de resultats que $ dpkg -l Comme le comportement de dpkg est si faiblement documente, il ne s'agit d'un bug ! ;-) Pour chercher des paquets, apt-cache search est plus adapte. -- Daniel Déchelotte http://yo.dan.free.fr/
Re: dpkg -l qui oublie des paquets ?
On 2004-12-17 12:59:36 +0100, Daniel Déchelotte wrote: Je seconde rixed dans sa question. J'ai exactement les memes resultats que lui que ce soit pour libflash-* ou rubybook. Je ne pense pas que dpkg se limite aux paquets qui ont ete installes : il y a une difference entre pn ou rc (resp. paquet purge ou desinstalle) et le un (paquet jamais installe) : Effectivement, dpkg -l sans autre argument semble filtrer tous les paquets pour lesquels Status = n. De même, dpkg --get-selections filtrer les paquets marqués purge. Comme le comportement de dpkg est si faiblement documente, il ne s'agit d'un bug ! ;-) Il s'agit d'un bug de la documentation. :) dpkg -l va peut-être chercher les infos dans /var/lib/dpkg/status, mais ça n'explique pas les paquets un (à moins qu'il liste aussi les noms de paquets trouvés dans les champs comme Recommends:, Suggests: et Depends:). -- Vincent Lefèvre [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Web: http://www.vinc17.org/ 100% accessible validated (X)HTML - Blog: http://www.vinc17.org/blog/ Work: CR INRIA - computer arithmetic / SPACES project at LORIA
Re: dpkg -l qui oublie des paquets ?
Vincent Lefevre wrote: On 2004-12-17 08:42:45 +0100, rixed wrote: dpkg -l rubybook me liste bien rubybook - et je vous jure que j'ai jamais installé ca. Il a peut-être été installé sans que tu t'en aperçoives. Ca m'étonnerais, je me suis jamais interressé à ruby, et aucun paquet de dépend de lui (et il ne dépend d'aucun paquet - ca doit pas etre fréquent un tel isolement chez les paquets).
Re: dpkg -l qui oublie des paquets ?
rixed a écrit : dpkg -l rubybook me liste bien rubybook - et je vous jure que j'ai jamais installé ca. Il a peut-être été installé sans que tu t'en aperçoives. Ca m'étonnerais, je me suis jamais interressé à ruby, et aucun paquet de dépend de lui (et il ne dépend d'aucun paquet - ca doit pas etre fréquent un tel isolement chez les paquets). Peut-être utilises-tu aptitude ou synaptic avec les Recommends considérés commes des Depends ? -- Raphaël 'SurcouF' Bordet http://debianfr.net/ | surcouf at debianfr dot net
dpkg -l qui oublie des paquets ?
Bonjour. Si je tappes dpkg -l 'libflash-*' il ne me liste que libflash-dev. Or si je tappe : apt-cache show libflash-mozplugin il connait bien le paquet. Pourquoi ce paquet n'est-il pas listé par dpkg -l ?
Re: dpkg -l qui oublie des paquets ?
Le jeudi 16 déc 2004 à 15 h 31, rixed a dit: Bonjour. bonjour Si je tappes dpkg -l 'libflash-*' il ne me liste que libflash-dev. moi ça me donne: [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ dpkg -l 'libflash-*' Souhait=inconnU/Installé/suppRimé/Purgé/H=à garder | État=Non/Installé/fichier-Config/dépaqUeté/échec-conFig/H=semi-instal lé|/ Err?=(aucune)/H=à garder/besoin Réinstallation/X=les deux (État,Err: majuscule=mauvais)||/ NomVersion Description+++-==-==- pn libflash-dev néant(aucune description n'est disponible) pn libflash-mozpl néant (aucune description n'est disponible) pn libflash-swfpl néant (aucune description n'est disponible) Or si je tappe : apt-cache show libflash-mozplugin il connait bien le paquet. Pourquoi ce paquet n'est-il pas listé par dpkg -l ? je n'en sais rien, désolé, ça marche normalement chez moi. -- Pensez à lire la FAQ de la liste avant de poser une question : http://wiki.debian.net/?DebianFrench Pensez à rajouter le mot ``spam'' dans vos champs From et Reply-To: To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: dpkg -l qui oublie des paquets ?
apt-cashe show .. donne juste les infos sur un parket qu´il soit installé ou pas essaye dpkg -l | grep libflash si tu n´as pas libflash-mozplugin .. ce qu´il n´ai pas installé tu peux tjrs verifier avec dpkg -l | less rixed [EMAIL PROTECTED] schrieb im Newsbeitrag news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Bonjour. Si je tappes dpkg -l 'libflash-*' il ne me liste que libflash-dev. Or si je tappe : apt-cache show libflash-mozplugin il connait bien le paquet. Pourquoi ce paquet n'est-il pas listé par dpkg -l ? -- Pensez à lire la FAQ de la liste avant de poser une question : http://wiki.debian.net/?DebianFrench Pensez à rajouter le mot ``spam'' dans vos champs From et Reply-To: To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: dpkg -l qui oublie des paquets ?
On 2004-12-16 15:31:37 +0100, rixed wrote: Si je tappes dpkg -l 'libflash-*' il ne me liste que libflash-dev. dpkg -l ne liste que ce qui est installé ou bien a été installé dans le passé mais pas complètement enlevé. Or si je tappe : apt-cache show libflash-mozplugin il connait bien le paquet. Il liste tout ce qui peut être installé (en particulier, s'il y a plusieurs sources ou distrib, apt-cache peut fournir plusieurs réponses pour un seul paquet). -- Vincent Lefèvre [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Web: http://www.vinc17.org/ 100% accessible validated (X)HTML - Blog: http://www.vinc17.org/blog/ Work: CR INRIA - computer arithmetic / SPACES project at LORIA
Re: Getting wide ``dpkg -l'' output in scripts and pipes.
Adam Funk wrote: On Tuesday 18 May 2004 10:40, Bob Proulx wrote: I would backup /var/backups. That directory includes a copy of the I already back up /etc. Where do the /var/backups/dpkg.status.* files come from? The come from: /var/lib/dpkg/status dpkg status file and a few other tidbits from the system. From that you can recreate your system. I use my own script to parse the data. I can post that if there is interest. Yes, I'm interested. It is a simple little ruby script from before I learned about dpkg-ruby or any of the other parsing routines. The copyright statement is bigger than the entire code. It is really a trivial little script. But in any case it should give you a hint of what is possible. Bob #!/usr/bin/env ruby # # Process a Debian status file and print out installed package names. # # Examples: # dpkg.status.print-installed /var/lib/dpkg/status # dpkg.status.print-installed /var/backups/dpkg.status.0 # zcat /var/backups/dpkg.status.1.gz | dpkg.status.print-installed # dpkg.status.print-installed (zcat /var/backups/dpkg.status.1.gz) # # The one-liner which is way too long but very useful. # # diff (dpkg.status.print-installed /var/lib/dpkg/status | sort) \ # (dpkg.status.print-installed (zcat /var/backups/dpkg.status.1.gz) | sort) # # # Copyright (C) 2003 Bob Proulx [EMAIL PROTECTED] # # This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify # it under the terms of the GNU General Public License as published by # the Free Software Foundation; either version 2 of the License, or # (at your option) any later version. # # This program is distributed in the hope that it will be useful, # but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of # MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. See the # GNU General Public License for more details. # # You should have received a copy of the GNU General Public License # along with this program; if not, write to the Free Software # Foundation, Inc., 59 Temple Place, Suite 330, Boston, MA 02111-1307 USA # # Lines look like this: # Package: telnet # Status: install ok installed # Package: wdiff # Status: purge ok not-installed packagename = ARGF.each do |line| # Walk each line of all input files. line.chomp! # Remove the newline from the end of the line. if line =~ /^Package: +/ # Keep track of the current package name. packagename = line.sub(/^Package: +/,'') end if line =~ /^Status: / # Remove the header. Split the line into the three fields. desired, status, state = line.sub(/^Status: +/,'').split if status == ok state == installed # If the pkg was okay and installed then print the package name. puts packagename end end end pgpp3ncSvlU03.pgp Description: PGP signature
Getting wide ``dpkg -l'' output in scripts and pipes.
(Sorry about the long lines but they illustrate the output I'm
talking about.)
``dpkg -l'' on its own in a terminal produces wide output, e.g.:
$ dpkg -l perl*
Desired=Unknown/Install/Remove/Purge/Hold
| Status=Not/Installed/Config-files/Unpacked/Failed-config/Half-installed
|/ Err?=(none)/Hold/Reinst-required/X=both-problems (Status,Err: uppercase=bad)
||/ NameVersion Description
+++-===-===-==
ii perl5.8.3-3 Larry
Wall's Practical Extraction and Report Language.
but when I send its output to a pipe or a file, I get narrow
output:
$ dpkg -l perl* |head
Desired=Unknown/Install/Remove/Purge/Hold
| Status=Not/Installed/Config-files/Unpacked/Failed-config/Half-installed
|/ Err?=(none)/Hold/Reinst-required/X=both-problems (Status,Err: uppercase=bad)
||/ Name VersionDescription
+++-==-==-
ii perl 5.8.3-3Larry Wall's Practical Extraction and Report
I want to dump a complete list of installed packages to a file as
part of my backup procedure. man dpkg-query suggests using
--showformat=format, in particular: Package information can be
included by inserting variable references to package fields using
the ${var[;width]} syntax. But it doesn't say what the variable
names are. Suggestions?
Thanks,
Adam
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Getting wide ``dpkg -l'' output in scripts and pipes.
--- Adam Funk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: (Sorry about the long lines but they illustrate the output I'm talking about.) ``dpkg -l'' on its own in a terminal produces wide output, e.g.: COLUMNS=200 dpkg -l | pipe | pipe | pipe | more | more | yay Change the value of 200, if it is too small. -- Thomas Adam = The Linux Weekend Mechanic -- http://linuxgazette.net TAG Editor -- http://linuxgazette.net shrug We'll just save up your sins, Thomas, and punish you for all of them at once when you get better. The experience will probably kill you. :) -- Benjamin A. Okopnik (Linux Gazette Technical Editor) Chat instantly with your online friends? Get the FREE Yahoo! Messenger http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Getting wide ``dpkg -l'' output in scripts and pipes.
Adam Funk wrote:
``dpkg -l'' on its own in a terminal produces wide output, e.g.:
[...]
but when I send its output to a pipe or a file, I get narrow
output:
I thought dpkg -l used COLUMNS or the current tty columns to base its
output. Which makes me think you have set 'COLUMNS=200 dpkg -l', which
is something I do.
I want to dump a complete list of installed packages to a file as
part of my backup procedure. man dpkg-query suggests using
--showformat=format, in particular: Package information can be
included by inserting variable references to package fields using
the ${var[;width]} syntax. But it doesn't say what the variable
names are. Suggestions?
I would backup /var/backups. That directory includes a copy of the
dpkg status file and a few other tidbits from the system. From that
you can recreate your system. I use my own script to parse the data.
I can post that if there is interest. It is simple. I would also
save /var/cache/debconf but it is not as critical.
Bob
pgpLe8umDZUSG.pgp
Description: PGP signature
Re: Getting wide ``dpkg -l'' output in scripts and pipes.
Adam Funk wrote:
(Sorry about the long lines but they illustrate the output I'm
talking about.)
``dpkg -l'' on its own in a terminal produces wide output, e.g.:
$ dpkg -l perl*
Desired=Unknown/Install/Remove/Purge/Hold
| Status=Not/Installed/Config-files/Unpacked/Failed-config/Half-installed
|/ Err?=(none)/Hold/Reinst-required/X=both-problems (Status,Err: uppercase=bad)
||/ NameVersion Description
+++-===-===-==
ii perl5.8.3-3 Larry
Wall's Practical Extraction and Report Language.
but when I send its output to a pipe or a file, I get narrow
output:
$ dpkg -l perl* |head
Desired=Unknown/Install/Remove/Purge/Hold
| Status=Not/Installed/Config-files/Unpacked/Failed-config/Half-installed
|/ Err?=(none)/Hold/Reinst-required/X=both-problems (Status,Err: uppercase=bad)
||/ Name VersionDescription
+++-==-==-
ii perl 5.8.3-3Larry Wall's Practical Extraction and Report
I want to dump a complete list of installed packages to a file as
part of my backup procedure. man dpkg-query suggests using
--showformat=format, in particular: Package information can be
included by inserting variable references to package fields using
the ${var[;width]} syntax. But it doesn't say what the variable
names are. Suggestions?
Thanks,
Adam
How about dpkg --get-selections
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Getting wide ``dpkg -l'' output in scripts and pipes.
On Tuesday 18 May 2004 10:20, Thomas Adam wrote: --- Adam Funk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: (Sorry about the long lines but they illustrate the output I'm talking about.) ``dpkg -l'' on its own in a terminal produces wide output, e.g.: COLUMNS=200 dpkg -l | pipe | pipe | pipe | more | more | yay Change the value of 200, if it is too small. Excellent. I had tried these: (COLUMNS=200 ; dpkg -l) |head (COLUMNS=200 dpkg -l) |head but got the narrow output. Why do these two fail? -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Getting wide ``dpkg -l'' output in scripts and pipes.
On Tuesday 18 May 2004 10:40, Bob Proulx wrote: I would backup /var/backups. That directory includes a copy of the I already back up /etc. Where do the /var/backups/dpkg.status.* files come from? dpkg status file and a few other tidbits from the system. From that you can recreate your system. I use my own script to parse the data. I can post that if there is interest. Yes, I'm interested. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Getting wide ``dpkg -l'' output in scripts and pipes.
--- Adam Funk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Tuesday 18 May 2004 10:20, Thomas Adam wrote: --- Adam Funk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: (Sorry about the long lines but they illustrate the output I'm talking about.) ``dpkg -l'' on its own in a terminal produces wide output, e.g.: COLUMNS=200 dpkg -l | pipe | pipe | pipe | more | more | yay Change the value of 200, if it is too small. Excellent. I had tried these: (COLUMNS=200 ; dpkg -l) |head (COLUMNS=200 dpkg -l) |head but got the narrow output. Why do these two fail? Because COLUMNS=200 is being set in a subshell. Thus, the resultant output when it is piped through to head is lost, since bash does not work in this way. Either you need to use process substitution or NOT run it in a subshell, as per my example in a previous e-mail. -- Thomas Adam = The Linux Weekend Mechanic -- http://linuxgazette.net TAG Editor -- http://linuxgazette.net shrug We'll just save up your sins, Thomas, and punish you for all of them at once when you get better. The experience will probably kill you. :) -- Benjamin A. Okopnik (Linux Gazette Technical Editor) Chat instantly with your online friends? Get the FREE Yahoo! Messenger http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Getting wide ``dpkg -l'' output in scripts and pipes.
On Tue, May 18, 2004 at 11:40:53AM +, Adam Funk wrote: On Tuesday 18 May 2004 10:20, Thomas Adam wrote: --- Adam Funk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: (Sorry about the long lines but they illustrate the output I'm talking about.) ``dpkg -l'' on its own in a terminal produces wide output, e.g.: COLUMNS=200 dpkg -l | pipe | pipe | pipe | more | more | yay Change the value of 200, if it is too small. Excellent. I had tried these: (COLUMNS=200 ; dpkg -l) |head (COLUMNS=200 dpkg -l) |head but got the narrow output. Why do these two fail? Those both set the COLUMNS shell variable but fail to export it to the dpkg subprocess (you need an explicit 'export' to do that). 'COLUMNS=200 dpkg -l' is a special syntax that adds the variable to the environment of the dpkg subprocess without affecting the shell in which it is executed. -- Colin Watson [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Getting wide ``dpkg -l'' output in scripts and pipes.
On Tue, May 18, 2004 at 01:18:50PM +0100, Thomas Adam wrote: --- Adam Funk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Excellent. I had tried these: (COLUMNS=200 ; dpkg -l) |head (COLUMNS=200 dpkg -l) |head but got the narrow output. Why do these two fail? Because COLUMNS=200 is being set in a subshell. Thus, the resultant output when it is piped through to head is lost, since bash does not work in this way. No; it doesn't matter whether head can see COLUMNS or not, and the output is not lost. You can tell this because both of these work fine: (export COLUMNS=200; dpkg -l) | head (COLUMNS=200 dpkg -l) | head ... as well as the more natural: COLUMNS=200 dpkg -l | head Cheers, -- Colin Watson [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Getting wide ``dpkg -l'' output in scripts and pipes.
On Tue, May 18, 2004 at 08:34:53AM +, Adam Funk wrote:
I want to dump a complete list of installed packages to a file as part
of my backup procedure. man dpkg-query suggests using
--showformat=format, in particular: Package information can be
included by inserting variable references to package fields using the
${var[;width]} syntax. But it doesn't say what the variable
names are. Suggestions?
It can be anything from the /var/lib/dpkg/status file, case insensitive.
--
George Cristian Birzan gcbirzan (at) wolfheart (dot) ro
Welcome thy neighbor into thy fallout shelter. He'll come in handy if
you run out of food.
-- Dean McLaughlin.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Getting wide ``dpkg -l'' output in scripts and pipes.
On Tuesday 18 May 2004 14:50, Colin Watson wrote: Those both set the COLUMNS shell variable but fail to export it to the dpkg subprocess (you need an explicit 'export' to do that). 'COLUMNS=200 dpkg -l' is a special syntax that adds the variable to the environment of the dpkg subprocess without affecting the shell in which it is executed. I wasn't aware of that special syntax so it had not occurred to me to try it -- it looked like a run-on of two commands that ought to have something between them. Very useful in general -- thanks! -- Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Getting wide ``dpkg -l'' output in scripts and pipes.
On 18. May 2004 at 2:03PM GMT, Adam Funk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Tuesday 18 May 2004 14:50, Colin Watson wrote: Those both set the COLUMNS shell variable but fail to export it to the dpkg subprocess (you need an explicit 'export' to do that). 'COLUMNS=200 dpkg -l' is a special syntax that adds the variable to the environment of the dpkg subprocess without affecting the shell in which it is executed. This doesn't work in all shells packaged for Debian. I use use env (coreutils): env COLUMNS=200 dpkg -l I wasn't aware of that special syntax so it had not occurred to me to try it -- it looked like a run-on of two commands that ought to have something between them. [...] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: synaptic zeigt mehr als dpkg -l
Danke. Bis her dachte ich apt wäre nur ein wrapper um dpkg (da es ja auch apt für rpm gibt). Ist halt nicht mein Thema ;-) Mfg, Tim Am Donnerstag, 22. April 2004 18:44 schrieb Andreas Metzler: Tim Ruehsen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: mich verwirrt, daß z.B. dpkg -l '*xpdf*' nicht die selbe Liste ausgibt, wie eine (Packet)Search nach 'xpdf' in Synaptic. Kann mir das jemand erklären? Ich verstehe anscheinend die dpkg Syntax nicht. [...] Vermutlich fragt synaptics direkt die apt-Datenbank ab, dpkg schaut dagegen in /var/lib/dpkg/available nach. Diese Datei laesst sich mit dselect update aktualisieren. cu andreas -- NMUs aren't an insult, they're not an attack, and they're not something to avoid or be ashamed of. Anthony Towns in 2004-02 on debian-devel
synaptic zeigt mehr als dpkg -l
Hi, mich verwirrt, daß z.B. dpkg -l '*xpdf*' nicht die selbe Liste ausgibt, wie eine (Packet)Search nach 'xpdf' in Synaptic. Kann mir das jemand erklären? Ich verstehe anscheinend die dpkg Syntax nicht. # dpkg -l '*xpdf*' un gs-pdfencrypt none (no description available) ii kpdf 3.2.2-1PDF viewer for KDE un pdf-viewer none (no description available) un xpdf-chinese-s none (no description available) un xpdf-chinese-t none (no description available) un xpdf-commonnone (no description available) un xpdf-japanese none (no description available) un xpdf-koreannone (no description available) un xpdf-readernone (no description available) Synaptic zeigt daneben noch folgende Packete an: xpdf xpdf-i xpdf-utils Mfg, Tim
Re: synaptic zeigt mehr als dpkg -l
Tim Ruehsen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: mich verwirrt, daß z.B. dpkg -l '*xpdf*' nicht die selbe Liste ausgibt, wie eine (Packet)Search nach 'xpdf' in Synaptic. Kann mir das jemand erklären? Ich verstehe anscheinend die dpkg Syntax nicht. [...] Vermutlich fragt synaptics direkt die apt-Datenbank ab, dpkg schaut dagegen in /var/lib/dpkg/available nach. Diese Datei laesst sich mit dselect update aktualisieren. cu andreas -- NMUs aren't an insult, they're not an attack, and they're not something to avoid or be ashamed of. Anthony Towns in 2004-02 on debian-devel
