apt-get autoremove, LIES!!
Every time I apt-get anything, I'm given a huge list of stuff the system thinks I don't need.
But I'm fairly sure I need stuff like kpdf, and kolf (full list below). Some of it I want to keep, the rest I have no idea if I need or not. I know I can set the ones I want to manually installed, but how am I supposed to know? Debian packs have stupid names at the best of times. Quote:
|
I see in your sig you're running Lenny, right? In that case, forget apt-get and use aptitude instead. This is a strong recommendation from the Debian dev's, as aptitude has better ways of detecting and coping with dependencies and problems with that.
Next: forget using the meta-packages. They're nice and easy, but take up space and cause these kind of problems. I recommend the following: 1) use 'aptitude keep-all' to keep all packages on your system 2) update your system with aptitude 3) remove meta-packages by purging them and then (re-)installing the 'real' packages (like gnome-core or xserver-xorg-core) |
ooooooooow, I knew this was going to suck, I hate aptitude.
|
I run Sid and apt-get autoremove has never went that crazy. I am betting you removed a big metapackage.
Screw aptitude. :) |
A little time with Google, and you will find hundreds and hundreds of posts about this. Here's my quick version:
|
Sorted, so sudo aptitude keep-all, forget being clean before now, but in future do the keep-all after meta packages, and use apt-get in peace.
Thanks all. |
I suffered a similar problem as well, and posted about it here: http://www.linuxquestions.org/questi...ything-696852/
What I don't understand is why removing a metapackage causes apt-get to think it should autoremove dependencies of installed software. |
Quote:
|
I never actually removed the meta-packadge (which I assume was KDE).
I did remove almost all of the standard KDE bloatware though, which might explain some of the entries. But no way do any of the multiple kmail clients or kfax machines depend on kolf. |
Quote:
Say: acmebinary is a dependency of acme-meta-package, which has just been removed from the system. acmebinary is also a dependency of some-other-package, which is still installed in the system. Even if acme-meta-package is removed, APT should realise the some-other-package still needs acmebinary, so should not try to autoremove it. |
Quote:
No, we want Kpdf, but libwhatever can go. How is apt to know the difference? |
Quote:
If you did it the way you want, you would end up with the reverse problem (I think). The apt tools would end up telling you, "You can't remove foo because bar depends on it." In any case, there are ways to fix the issues when they come up: explicitly reinstall acmebinary, and then some-other-package and acmebinary can stay on your system happily ever after. So, if you want a metapackage, but not all of it, then just install the bits you do want explicitly. There is also the aptitude keep-all trick I mentioned earlier. |
I think it would have been better is Autoremove had not been added, or that you can enable with a parameter. Disk space is cheap, package sizes are small, and there is no registry slowing down the machine if too many programs are installed.
It should be realized though that it usually doesn't do unreversible harm if you proceed with the autoremove. If you remove too much, simply reinstall the packages you lost. Settings remain on the machine anyway. I ignore the Autoremove recommendations. jlinkels |
Quote:
I love a good rant on Windows as much as the next man, but don't hate the registry for performance. There's a perfectly good eggs in one basket argument to use instead. |
Quote:
If I use regedit to search for some key, it takes *seconds* on a fast machine to search thru a registry of a few megabytes. That fits in the assumption that the registry is slow to use. If it is just a bad implementation of the regedit search function, I wonder why MS has not been abale to fix it since 1995. In Linux, no matter how many packages I have installed (and on some machines that is QUITE a lot) it stays fast as ever. If I can find an good and true explanation for Windows' degradation over time other than the registry, I will use it in the future. I like a good rant too, but dislike telling untruth. jlinkels |
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:52 PM. |