On Thu, Jun 07, 2007 at 03:26:40PM +0300, Marius Vollmer wrote: > "ext maemo-users-bounces at maemo.org" <maemo-users-bounces at maemo.org> writes: > > > And the big problem with aptitude is that if you use apt as well as > > aptitude, apt never puts the packages apt installed into its data base > > as being explicitly requested -- so on various occasions it discovers > > they are no longer needed and so proposes to remove them. > > Exactly, that's why I gave up on it when it proposed to remove half of > Gnome when I used it the first time... :-) aptitude is OK if it's the *only* thing you use. > > > Does the Application manager do these things too? > > It does it the other way around: it keeps a database of the packages > that have been installed automatically to satisfy dependencies. > Whenever a package is removed, its dependencies are checked and > removed as well if they are no longer needed are in the list of > 'automatically installed packages'. > > Thus, the AM is more conservative with removals. It will not > automatically remove a package that it hasn't installed in the first > place. Sounds good. > > (libapt-pkg maintains a 'auto' bit for each package in its in-core > data structures, but it doesn't save it to disk. That could be fixed > and aptitude and the AM could then drop their own databases, and would > even correctly interoperate with apt-get at that point, hopefully.) I wonder if this should be reported as a bug for the upstream developers of apt. -- hendrik
