FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
» Video Reviews

» Linux Archive

Linux-archive is a website aiming to archive linux email lists and to make them easily accessible for linux users/developers.


» Sponsor

» Partners

» Sponsor

Go Back   Linux Archive > Debian > Debian User

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 02-06-2008, 08:53 PM
Florian Kulzer
 
Default Non-understood advice - was dist-upgrade from sarge to etch - package

On Wed, Feb 06, 2008 at 20:34:14 +0000, Felix Karpfen wrote:
> On Tue, 05 Feb 2008 18:54:08 +0100, Florian Kulzer wrote:
> > Check for non-Debian packages on your system by running:
> >
> > aptitude search '~i!~Odebian'
>
> As an aptitude-novice, I tried the above command on my
> fully-operational upgrade from Sarge to Etch. It gave a long list of
> installed packages - almost all of which were part of the Debian
> install.

What does your sources.list look like? I could understand this behavior
if you had non-Debian archives included that provide packages with the
same names as official packages. (The backports archive would be an
example.) The above search term matches any packet that is installed and
that has a non-Debian version in one of the archives known by apt; this
non-Debian version does not have to be the one that is actually
installed. If you want to avoid this ambiguity then you have to add the
version narrowing operator:

aptitude search '~S~i!~Odebian'

It is also possible that you found a bug in the Etch version of
aptitude; I use version 0.4.10-1+b1 on Sid and these search terms work
as expected on my system.

> The generated list included one of the two non-Debian packages (opera)-
> deleted during the install and replaced subsequently. It failed to find
> the only other non-Debian package (vuescan).

How did you install vuescan? Maybe it does not properly identify itself
as non-Debian.

> I also ran the following:
>
> | $ aptitude search '~i! ~Odebian' | grep opera*

Side note: The asterisk is not necessary here. You are probably mixing
up bash globbing and regular expressions.

> and got :
>
> | i eject - ejects CDs and operates CD-Changers
> | i opera - The Opera Web Browser
>
> What have I <missed|misunderstood>?

I don't see any problem with the last part; both these lines contain the
string "opera", so they match the expression for which you are grepping.

--
Regards, | http://users.icfo.es/Florian.Kulzer
Florian |


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
 
Old 02-07-2008, 02:06 AM
Daniel Burrows
 
Default Non-understood advice - was dist-upgrade from sarge to etch - package

On Wed, Feb 06, 2008 at 10:53:48PM +0100, Florian Kulzer <florian.kulzer+debian@icfo.es> was heard to say:
> On Wed, Feb 06, 2008 at 20:34:14 +0000, Felix Karpfen wrote:
> > On Tue, 05 Feb 2008 18:54:08 +0100, Florian Kulzer wrote:
> > > Check for non-Debian packages on your system by running:
> > >
> > > aptitude search '~i!~Odebian'
> >
> > As an aptitude-novice, I tried the above command on my
> > fully-operational upgrade from Sarge to Etch. It gave a long list of
> > installed packages - almost all of which were part of the Debian
> > install.
>
> What does your sources.list look like? I could understand this behavior
> if you had non-Debian archives included that provide packages with the
> same names as official packages. (The backports archive would be an
> example.) The above search term matches any packet that is installed and
> that has a non-Debian version in one of the archives known by apt; this
> non-Debian version does not have to be the one that is actually
> installed. If you want to avoid this ambiguity then you have to add the
> version narrowing operator:

Packages that are obsolete are IIRC considered to have no origin,
because they aren't included in any known package archive. You could
try searching for '~i!~Odebian!~o instead, maybe.

> > The generated list included one of the two non-Debian packages (opera)-
> > deleted during the install and replaced subsequently. It failed to find
> > the only other non-Debian package (vuescan).
>
> How did you install vuescan? Maybe it does not properly identify itself
> as non-Debian.

Any package that isn't in an archive with Origin: Debian will be
matched by that expression; whoever provides the vuescan package would
have had to go out of their way to label their archive as being a Debian
archive in order for this to happen. "apt-cache policy vuescan" and/or
"apt-cache showpkg vuescan" might give a hint about what's happening.

Daniel


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
 
Old 02-09-2008, 01:40 AM
Daniel Burrows
 
Default Non-understood advice - was dist-upgrade from sarge to etch - package

On Fri, Feb 08, 2008 at 08:54:02PM +0000, Felix Karpfen <felixk@webone.com.au> was heard to say:
> On Wed, 06 Feb 2008 20:34:14 +0000, Felix Karpfen wrote:
> They failed to address my misunderstanding and the fault was mine.
>
> My concern arose not from the absence of "vuescan" (which - as pointed
> out - is a monolithic binary package) but the presence of many dozens
> of packages that were *not* non-Debian packages.
>
> The concern arose from the fact that - following the upgrade
> instructions to the letter - I recollect running a command that
> identified non-Debian packages as part of the upgrade to Etch and *the
> command gave the expected output*. But, alas, I can no longer find
> what that command was.

I'm now completely confused. The problem is just that you want to
find the command that you ran before? Am I understanding correctly?

Daniel


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
 
Old 02-09-2008, 07:03 PM
Felix Karpfen
 
Default Non-understood advice - was dist-upgrade from sarge to etch - package

On Fri, 08 Feb 2008 18:40:09 -0800, Daniel Burrows wrote:

> On Fri, Feb 08, 2008 at 08:54:02PM +0000, Felix Karpfen
><felixk@webone.com.
>
>> I recollect running a command that identified non-Debian packages
>> as part of the upgrade to Etch and *the command gave the expected
>> output*. But, alas, I can no longer find what that command was.
>
> I'm now completely confused. The problem is just that you want to
> find the command that you ran before? Am I understanding correctly?
>
> Daniel

I was hoping that:

| aptitude search '~i!~Odebian'

was the command that I ran successfully as part of the upgrade from
Sarge to Etch and had forgotten.

If it is the same command, it is now behaving quite differently. I
refrained from posting the output that it now produces because the
output is lengthy and I wanted to conserve bandwidth. But here are the
first few lines of that output:

| i a2ps - GNU a2ps - 'Anything to PostScript' conver
| i A abiword-common - WYSIWYG word processor based on GTK2
| i A abiword-gnome - WYSIWYG word processor based on GTK2/GNOME
| i abiword-help - online help for AbiWord
| i adduser - Add and remove users and groups
| i afio - archive file manipulation program
| i A akregator - RSS feed aggregator for KDE
| i alien - install non-native packages with dpkg
| i alsa-base - ALSA driver configuration files
| i alsa-oss - ALSA wrapper for OSS applications
| i alsa-utils - ALSA utilities

I hope that makes things clearer.

It is just a niggle. Etch works like a charm!

Felix Karpfen
--
Felix Karpfen
Public Key 72FDF9DF (DH/DSA)


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
 
Old 02-10-2008, 01:31 PM
Florian Kulzer
 
Default Non-understood advice - was dist-upgrade from sarge to etch - package

On Sat, Feb 09, 2008 at 20:03:37 +0000, Felix Karpfen wrote:
> On Fri, 08 Feb 2008 18:40:09 -0800, Daniel Burrows wrote:
> > On Fri, Feb 08, 2008 at 08:54:02PM +0000, Felix Karpfen wrote:
> >
> >> I recollect running a command that identified non-Debian packages
> >> as part of the upgrade to Etch and *the command gave the expected
> >> output*. But, alas, I can no longer find what that command was.
> >
> > I'm now completely confused. The problem is just that you want to
> > find the command that you ran before? Am I understanding correctly?
> >
> > Daniel
>
> I was hoping that:
>
> | aptitude search '~i!~Odebian'
>
> was the command that I ran successfully as part of the upgrade from
> Sarge to Etch and had forgotten.
>
> If it is the same command, it is now behaving quite differently. I
> refrained from posting the output that it now produces because the
> output is lengthy and I wanted to conserve bandwidth. But here are the
> first few lines of that output:
>
> | i a2ps - GNU a2ps - 'Anything to PostScript' conver
> | i A abiword-common - WYSIWYG word processor based on GTK2
> | i A abiword-gnome - WYSIWYG word processor based on GTK2/GNOME
> | i abiword-help - online help for AbiWord
> | i adduser - Add and remove users and groups
> | i afio - archive file manipulation program
> | i A akregator - RSS feed aggregator for KDE
> | i alien - install non-native packages with dpkg
> | i alsa-base - ALSA driver configuration files
> | i alsa-oss - ALSA wrapper for OSS applications
> | i alsa-utils - ALSA utilities

What do youe see when you run

apt-cache policy a2ps adduser alsa-base

?

--
Regards, | http://users.icfo.es/Florian.Kulzer
Florian |


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
 
Old 02-10-2008, 07:36 PM
Felix Karpfen
 
Default Non-understood advice - was dist-upgrade from sarge to etch - package

On Sun, 10 Feb 2008 15:31:27 +0100, Florian Kulzer wrote:

> What do you see when you run
> apt-cache policy a2ps adduser alsa-base
> ?

The following:

| a2ps:
| Installed: 1:4.13b.dfsg.1-1
| Candidate: 1:4.13b.dfsg.1-1
| Version table:
| *** 1:4.13b.dfsg.1-1 0
| 500 cdrom://[Debian GNU/Linux 4.0 r0 _Etch_ - Official i386 DVD Binary-1 20070407-11:40] unstable/main Packages
| 100 /var/lib/dpkg/status
| adduser:
| Installed: 3.102
| Candidate: 3.102
| Version table:
| *** 3.102 0
| 500 cdrom://[Debian GNU/Linux 4.0 r0 _Etch_ - Official i386 DVD Binary-1 20070407-11:40] unstable/main Packages
| 100 /var/lib/dpkg/status
| alsa-base:
| Installed: 1.0.13-5
| Candidate: 1.0.13-5
| Version table:
| *** 1.0.13-5 0
| 500 cdrom://[Debian GNU/Linux 4.0 r0 _Etch_ - Official i386 DVD Binary-1 20070407-11:40] unstable/main Packages
| 100 /var/lib/dpkg/status


Felix Karpfen
--
Felix Karpfen
Public Key 72FDF9DF (DH/DSA)


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
 
Old 02-10-2008, 09:00 PM
Florian Kulzer
 
Default Non-understood advice - was dist-upgrade from sarge to etch - package

On Sun, Feb 10, 2008 at 20:36:04 +0000, Felix Karpfen wrote:
> On Sun, 10 Feb 2008 15:31:27 +0100, Florian Kulzer wrote:

[ We are trying to figure out why "aptitude search '~i!~Odebian'", a
command meant to find all installed non-Debian packages, returns so
many false positives on Felix's Debian Etch system. ]

> > What do you see when you run
> > apt-cache policy a2ps adduser alsa-base
> > ?
>
> The following:
>
> | a2ps:
> | Installed: 1:4.13b.dfsg.1-1
> | Candidate: 1:4.13b.dfsg.1-1
> | Version table:
> | *** 1:4.13b.dfsg.1-1 0
> | 500 cdrom://[Debian GNU/Linux 4.0 r0 _Etch_ - Official i386 DVD Binary-1 20070407-11:40] unstable/main Packages
> | 100 /var/lib/dpkg/status

[...]

Why does apt not recognise the packages from the DVDs as official Debian
packages? Please post the output of:

grep ^Origin /var/lib/apt/lists/*_Release

--
Regards, | http://users.icfo.es/Florian.Kulzer
Florian |


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
 
Old 02-11-2008, 08:45 PM
Felix Karpfen
 
Default Non-understood advice - was dist-upgrade from sarge to etch - package

On Sun, 10 Feb 2008 23:00:13 +0100, Florian Kulzer wrote:

> Please post the output of:
>
> grep ^Origin /var/lib/apt/lists/*_Release
>

No output

Perhaps "ls -lt /var/lib/apt/lists" will tell you something. It lists:


total 19224
-rw-r----- 1 root root 0 2008-01-20 21:10 lock
drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 6 2007-06-07 11:09 partial
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 8563083 2007-06-07 07:29 Debian%20GNU_Linux%204.0%20r0%20%5fEtch%5f%20-%20Official%20i386%20DVD%20Binary-3%2020070407-11:40_dists_unstable_main_binary-i386_Packages
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 153166 2007-06-07 07:29 Debian%20GNU_Linux%204.0%20r0%20%5fEtch%5f%20-%20Official%20i386%20DVD%20Binary-3%2020070407-11:40_dists_unstable_contrib_binary-i386_Packages
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 5637840 2007-06-07 07:25 Debian%20GNU_Linux%204.0%20r0%20%5fEtch%5f%20-%20Official%20i386%20DVD%20Binary-2%2020070407-11:40_dists_unstable_main_binary-i386_Packages
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 48687 2007-06-07 07:25 Debian%20GNU_Linux%204.0%20r0%20%5fEtch%5f%20-%20Official%20i386%20DVD%20Binary-2%2020070407-11:40_dists_unstable_contrib_binary-i386_Packages
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 5253161 2007-06-07 07:22 Debian%20GNU_Linux%204.0%20r0%20%5fEtch%5f%20-%20Official%20i386%20DVD%20Binary-1%2020070407-11:40_dists_unstable_main_binary-i386_Packages
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 18707 2007-06-07 07:22 Debian%20GNU_Linux%204.0%20r0%20%5fEtch%5f%20-%20Official%20i386%20DVD%20Binary-1%2020070407-11:40_dists_unstable_contrib_binary-i386_Packages

Felix

--
Felix Karpfen
Public Key 72FDF9DF (DH/DSA)


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
 
Old 02-11-2008, 09:13 PM
Florian Kulzer
 
Default Non-understood advice - was dist-upgrade from sarge to etch - package

On Mon, Feb 11, 2008 at 21:45:24 +0000, Felix Karpfen wrote:
> On Sun, 10 Feb 2008 23:00:13 +0100, Florian Kulzer wrote:
>
> > Please post the output of:
> >
> > grep ^Origin /var/lib/apt/lists/*_Release
> >
>
> No output
>
> Perhaps "ls -lt /var/lib/apt/lists" will tell you something. It lists:
>
>
> total 19224
> -rw-r----- 1 root root 0 2008-01-20 21:10 lock
> drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 6 2007-06-07 11:09 partial
> -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 8563083 2007-06-07 07:29 Debian%20GNU_Linux%204.0%20r0%20%5fEtch%5f%20-%20Official%20i386%20DVD%20Binary-3%2020070407-11:40_dists_unstable_main_binary-i386_Packages
> -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 153166 2007-06-07 07:29 Debian%20GNU_Linux%204.0%20r0%20%5fEtch%5f%20-%20Official%20i386%20DVD%20Binary-3%2020070407-11:40_dists_unstable_contrib_binary-i386_Packages
> -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 5637840 2007-06-07 07:25 Debian%20GNU_Linux%204.0%20r0%20%5fEtch%5f%20-%20Official%20i386%20DVD%20Binary-2%2020070407-11:40_dists_unstable_main_binary-i386_Packages
> -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 48687 2007-06-07 07:25 Debian%20GNU_Linux%204.0%20r0%20%5fEtch%5f%20-%20Official%20i386%20DVD%20Binary-2%2020070407-11:40_dists_unstable_contrib_binary-i386_Packages
> -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 5253161 2007-06-07 07:22 Debian%20GNU_Linux%204.0%20r0%20%5fEtch%5f%20-%20Official%20i386%20DVD%20Binary-1%2020070407-11:40_dists_unstable_main_binary-i386_Packages
> -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 18707 2007-06-07 07:22 Debian%20GNU_Linux%204.0%20r0%20%5fEtch%5f%20-%20Official%20i386%20DVD%20Binary-1%2020070407-11:40_dists_unstable_contrib_binary-i386_Packages

Hmm, obviously there are no Release files for the DVDs, either because
they do not exist on the DVDs themselves or because apt-cdrom does not
copy them to /var/lib/apt/lists. The "~O" match of aptitude relies on
the "Origin: ..." statement in the Release files AFAIK, so it will not
work here.

I have no idea if this is the expected behavior for DVDs (and maybe CDs
as well), because I never bother to keep the netinstall cdrom line in my
sources.list. You might have to add a Debian mirror to the sources.list
and run aptitude update if you want to make the "~O" match working. If
that computer is connected to the internet at all then you should have
the security repository included anyhow, even if you don't care about
the rest.

To address your original problem, it might be enough to search for
obsolete packages:

aptitude search '~o"

(lowercase o!)

--
Regards, | http://users.icfo.es/Florian.Kulzer
Florian |


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
 
Old 02-13-2008, 08:01 PM
Felix Karpfen
 
Default Non-understood advice - was dist-upgrade from sarge to etch - package

On Mon, 11 Feb 2008 23:13:58 +0100, Florian Kulzer wrote:

On Mon, 11 Feb 2008 23:13:58 +0100, Florian Kulzer wrote:

> On Mon, Feb 11, 2008 at 21:45:24 +0000, Felix Karpfen wrote:
>> On Sun, 10 Feb 2008 23:00:13 +0100, Florian Kulzer wrote:
>>
>> > Please post the output of:
>> >
>> > grep ^Origin /var/lib/apt/lists/*_Release
>> >
>> >
>> No output


> The "~O" match of aptitude relies on the "Origin: ..." statement in the
> Release files AFAIK, so it will not work here.

There is a Release file on DVD1 in the /dist/etch directory. It contains
md5sums. No reference to "Origin".


> If that computer is connected to the internet at all then you should
> have the security repository included anyhow.

Currently it is present in /etc/apt/sources.list and commented out :-(.

When I get my courage up to use "apt-zip", I will remove the mark and
bring my OS up-to-date. Hitherto, all the flagged security issues have
been "local" and hence are not a problem when there is only one user.


Thank you for taking the time to clarify my confusion.

Felix Karpfen



--
Felix Karpfen
Public Key 72FDF9DF (DH/DSA)


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 06:33 PM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright 2007 - 2008, www.linux-archive.org