Web lists-archives.com

Re: apt{-cache,-get,itude} show wrong version of package after update




On Fri 06 Apr 2018 at 07:36:09 (+0900), Mark Fletcher wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 28, 2018 at 09:31:11AM +0200, tomas@xxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> > On Wed, Mar 28, 2018 at 07:47:05AM +0900, Mark Fletcher wrote:
> > 
> > [...]
> > 
> > > I'm not sure if you really did what it sounds like you did here, but if 
> > > you did... you can't mix and match commands to apt-get and aptitude.
> > 
> > I think this is false, at least in such an unrestricted and
> > sweeping way. Apt (and apt-get, its younger cousin) and aptitude
> > are just front ends to dpkg and use the same data bases in
> > the background.
> > 
> > In particular...
> > 
> > > You did apt-get update so you need to use apt-get upgrade, or 
> > > dist-upgrade, or whatever the apt-get command is
> > 
> > ...apt update and apt-get update are equivalent (as most
> > probably aptitude update is).
> > 
> 
> It wasn't apt and apt-get that were being compared though, it was 
> aptitude and apt-get. And there _is_ some sort of difference between 
> those two such that you have to update with the right one; I'm sure I've 
> seen discussion of that on this forum before (I don't have links 
> though).
> 
> > >                                             (I don't much use 
> > > apt-get, have switched to the apt command since upgrading to stretch).
> > 
> > Apt is just a friendlier front-end for apt-get: the command
> > outputs are not compatible (and you'll see a warning to that
> > effect in apt, aimed at those who want to use apt's output
> > in scripts), and aptitude has, AFAIK, some *extra* databases
> > to record user intention, and a different dependency resolver,
> > but the basic data sets (which packages are available, what
> > state each is in, etc.) are common.
> 
> See above. The only person who mentioned apt was me, and even then only 
> in the context of that's what I use nowadays. The OP never mentioned apt.
> 
> In any case, those "extra databases" are probably a pretty good reason 
> not to mix and match front-ends in quite the way the OP was doing, even 
> if it doesn't immediately lead straight to trouble trying to get one's 
> system updated properly in the way I suggested it might.

I assume you're talking about aptitude's files in /var/lib/aptitude/.
I don't see any version information there, so what do you expect their
effect to be on updating/upgrading?

> > > If you want to use aptitude upgrade, or dist-upgrade, or safe-upgrade, 
> > > or whatever the command is (embarrassingly I have forgotten, I used 
> > > aptitude for years _before_ upgrading to stretch) you need to first do 
> > > aptitude update.
> > > 
> > > apt-get update followed by aptitude upgrade will lead to pain.
> > 
> > I don't think so: but I'm ready to be proven wrong!
> > 
> 
> Certainly I have no proof except my experience

Correct me if I'm wrong but I don't think you've shared any.

> and my (patchy) memory 
> that I have seen discussion of this point on this list before.
> 
> Anyway the actual issue in this case turned out to be nothing to do with 
> mixing and matching front-ends to dpkg. Glad the OP got his problem 
> figured out.

Cheers,
David.