Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.debian.user > #242852 > unrolled thread
| Started by | <teamaster@mad-hatters-teatime.teanet.org> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2021-12-10 00:00 +0100 |
| Last post | 2021-12-10 02:00 +0100 |
| Articles | 12 — 7 participants |
Back to article view | Back to linux.debian.user
upgrade - packages have been kept back <teamaster@mad-hatters-teatime.teanet.org> - 2021-12-10 00:00 +0100
Re: upgrade - packages have been kept back "Andrew M.A. Cater" <amacater@einval.com> - 2021-12-10 00:10 +0100
Re: upgrade - packages have been kept back <teamaster@mad-hatters-teatime.teanet.org> - 2021-12-10 09:10 +0100
Re: upgrade - packages have been kept back john doe <johndoe65534@mail.com> - 2021-12-10 09:30 +0100
Re: upgrade - packages have been kept back <teamaster@mad-hatters-teatime.teanet.org> - 2021-12-10 14:30 +0100
Re: upgrade - packages have been kept back Reco <recoverym4n@enotuniq.net> - 2021-12-10 14:20 +0100
Re: upgrade - packages have been kept back Tim Woodall <debianuser@woodall.me.uk> - 2021-12-10 18:50 +0100
Re: upgrade - packages have been kept back <teamaster@mad-hatters-teatime.teanet.org> - 2021-12-10 23:40 +0100
Re: upgrade - packages have been kept back Andrei POPESCU <andreimpopescu@gmail.com> - 2021-12-11 00:00 +0100
Re: upgrade - packages have been kept back <teamaster@mad-hatters-teatime.teanet.org> - 2021-12-11 02:00 +0100
Re: upgrade - packages have been kept back Andrei POPESCU <andreimpopescu@gmail.com> - 2021-12-11 10:10 +0100
Re: upgrade - packages have been kept back Greg Wooledge <greg@wooledge.org> - 2021-12-10 02:00 +0100
| From | <teamaster@mad-hatters-teatime.teanet.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-12-10 00:00 +0100 |
| Subject | upgrade - packages have been kept back |
| Message-ID | <DsAym-6HA-5@gated-at.bofh.it> |
hey, i have not been using debian for long and not sure how to proceed here. is a: apt-get upgrade linux-image-amd64 the right way? ty, jens. --snip-- root@saira:~# apt list --upgradable -a Listing... Done linux-image-amd64/oldstable 4.19+105+deb10u13 amd64 [upgradable from: 4.19+105+deb10u8] linux-image-amd64/oldstable 4.19+105+deb10u9 amd64 linux-image-amd64/now 4.19+105+deb10u8 amd64 [installed,upgradable to: 4.19+105+deb10u13] root@saira:~# apt-get upgrade Reading package lists... Done Building dependency tree Reading state information... Done Calculating upgrade... Done The following packages have been kept back: linux-image-amd64:amd64 0 upgraded, 0 newly installed, 0 to remove and 1 not upgraded. root@saira:~# apt search linux-image-amd64 Sorting... Done Full Text Search... Done linux-image-amd64/oldstable 4.19+105+deb10u13 amd64 [upgradable from: 4.19+105+deb10u8] Linux for 64-bit PCs (meta-package) linux-image-amd64-dbg/oldstable 4.19+105+deb10u13 amd64 Debugging symbols for Linux amd64 configuration (meta-package) linux-image-amd64-signed-template/oldstable 4.19.208-1 amd64 Template for signed linux-image packages for amd64
[toc] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Andrew M.A. Cater" <amacater@einval.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-12-10 00:10 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <DsAI2-70n-11@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #242852 |
On Thu, Dec 09, 2021 at 11:58:33PM +0100, teamaster@mad-hatters-teatime.teanet.org wrote: > hey, > i have not been using debian for long and not sure how to proceed here. > is a: > apt-get upgrade linux-image-amd64 > the right way? > ty, jens. apt-get update ; apt-get upgrade [You need to pull in an up to date list of packages first] All best, Andy Cater > > --snip-- > root@saira:~# apt list --upgradable -a > Listing... Done > linux-image-amd64/oldstable 4.19+105+deb10u13 amd64 [upgradable from: > 4.19+105+deb10u8] linux-image-amd64/oldstable 4.19+105+deb10u9 amd64 > linux-image-amd64/now 4.19+105+deb10u8 amd64 [installed,upgradable to: > 4.19+105+deb10u13] > > root@saira:~# apt-get upgrade > Reading package lists... Done > Building dependency tree > Reading state information... Done > Calculating upgrade... Done > The following packages have been kept back: > linux-image-amd64:amd64 > 0 upgraded, 0 newly installed, 0 to remove and 1 not upgraded. > > root@saira:~# apt search linux-image-amd64 > Sorting... Done > Full Text Search... Done > linux-image-amd64/oldstable 4.19+105+deb10u13 amd64 [upgradable from: > 4.19+105+deb10u8] Linux for 64-bit PCs (meta-package) > > linux-image-amd64-dbg/oldstable 4.19+105+deb10u13 amd64 > Debugging symbols for Linux amd64 configuration (meta-package) > > linux-image-amd64-signed-template/oldstable 4.19.208-1 amd64 > Template for signed linux-image packages for amd64 >
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | <teamaster@mad-hatters-teatime.teanet.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-12-10 09:10 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <DsJ8B-402-1@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #242855 |
On Thu, 9 Dec 2021 23:09:34 +0000 "Andrew M.A. Cater" <amacater@einval.com> wrote: > On Thu, Dec 09, 2021 at 11:58:33PM +0100, > teamaster@mad-hatters-teatime.teanet.org wrote: > > hey, > > i have not been using debian for long and not sure how to proceed > > here. is a: > > apt-get upgrade linux-image-amd64 > > the right way? > > ty, jens. > > apt-get update ; apt-get upgrade > > [You need to pull in an up to date list of packages first] exactly that did not work > > --snip-- > > root@saira:~# apt list --upgradable -a > > Listing... Done > > linux-image-amd64/oldstable 4.19+105+deb10u13 amd64 [upgradable > > from: 4.19+105+deb10u8] linux-image-amd64/oldstable > > 4.19+105+deb10u9 amd64 linux-image-amd64/now 4.19+105+deb10u8 amd64 > > [installed,upgradable to: 4.19+105+deb10u13] > > > > root@saira:~# apt-get upgrade > > Reading package lists... Done > > Building dependency tree > > Reading state information... Done > > Calculating upgrade... Done > > The following packages have been kept back: > > linux-image-amd64:amd64 > > 0 upgraded, 0 newly installed, 0 to remove and 1 not upgraded. > > > > root@saira:~# apt search linux-image-amd64 > > Sorting... Done > > Full Text Search... Done > > linux-image-amd64/oldstable 4.19+105+deb10u13 amd64 [upgradable > > from: 4.19+105+deb10u8] Linux for 64-bit PCs (meta-package) > > > > linux-image-amd64-dbg/oldstable 4.19+105+deb10u13 amd64 > > Debugging symbols for Linux amd64 configuration (meta-package) > > > > linux-image-amd64-signed-template/oldstable 4.19.208-1 amd64 > > Template for signed linux-image packages for amd64 > > >
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | john doe <johndoe65534@mail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-12-10 09:30 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <DsJii-42Y-1@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #242875 |
On 12/10/2021 9:04 AM, teamaster@mad-hatters-teatime.teanet.org wrote: > On Thu, 9 Dec 2021 23:09:34 +0000 > "Andrew M.A. Cater" <amacater@einval.com> wrote: > >> On Thu, Dec 09, 2021 at 11:58:33PM +0100, >> teamaster@mad-hatters-teatime.teanet.org wrote: >>> hey, >>> i have not been using debian for long and not sure how to proceed >>> here. is a: >>> apt-get upgrade linux-image-amd64 >>> the right way? >>> ty, jens. >> >> apt-get update ; apt-get upgrade >> >> [You need to pull in an up to date list of packages first] > > exactly that did not work > $ apt-get -V install linux-image-amd64 HTH. -- John Doe
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | <teamaster@mad-hatters-teatime.teanet.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-12-10 14:30 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <DsO8h-6Vs-5@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #242876 |
On Fri, 10 Dec 2021 09:15:40 +0100 john doe <johndoe65534@mail.com> wrote: > On 12/10/2021 9:04 AM, teamaster@mad-hatters-teatime.teanet.org wrote: > > On Thu, 9 Dec 2021 23:09:34 +0000 > > "Andrew M.A. Cater" <amacater@einval.com> wrote: > > > >> On Thu, Dec 09, 2021 at 11:58:33PM +0100, > >> teamaster@mad-hatters-teatime.teanet.org wrote: > >>> hey, > >>> i have not been using debian for long and not sure how to proceed > >>> here. is a: > >>> apt-get upgrade linux-image-amd64 > >>> the right way? > >>> ty, jens. > >> > >> apt-get update ; apt-get upgrade > >> > >> [You need to pull in an up to date list of packages first] > > > > exactly that did not work > > > > $ apt-get -V install linux-image-amd64 thx, that helps
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Reco <recoverym4n@enotuniq.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-12-10 14:20 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <DsNYB-6Sa-1@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #242875 |
Hi. On Fri, Dec 10, 2021 at 09:04:25AM +0100, teamaster@mad-hatters-teatime.teanet.org wrote: > On Thu, 9 Dec 2021 23:09:34 +0000 > "Andrew M.A. Cater" <amacater@einval.com> wrote: > > > On Thu, Dec 09, 2021 at 11:58:33PM +0100, > > teamaster@mad-hatters-teatime.teanet.org wrote: > > > hey, > > > i have not been using debian for long and not sure how to proceed > > > here. is a: > > > apt-get upgrade linux-image-amd64 > > > the right way? > > > ty, jens. > > > > apt-get update ; apt-get upgrade > > > > [You need to pull in an up to date list of packages first] > > exactly that did not work And it's because it should not work in the first place in the situation like this. "apt-get upgrade" should and will refuse to install any new packages (or uninstall existing ones). What should solve your problem is: apt update; apt upgrade And it's because "apt" (not to be confused with "apt-get") is allowed to install new packages during the update. What also could solve your problem (but it's inherently dangerous, as it will allow to remove installed packages as well) is: apt-get update; apt-get dist-upgrade In short, when in doubt, use "apt", not "apt-get". Reco
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Tim Woodall <debianuser@woodall.me.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-12-10 18:50 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <DsSbT-PO-9@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #242875 |
On Fri, 10 Dec 2021, teamaster@mad-hatters-teatime.teanet.org wrote: > On Thu, 9 Dec 2021 23:09:34 +0000 > "Andrew M.A. Cater" <amacater@einval.com> wrote: > >> On Thu, Dec 09, 2021 at 11:58:33PM +0100, >> teamaster@mad-hatters-teatime.teanet.org wrote: >>> hey, >>> i have not been using debian for long and not sure how to proceed >>> here. is a: >>> apt-get upgrade linux-image-amd64 >>> the right way? >>> ty, jens. >> >> apt-get update ; apt-get upgrade >> >> [You need to pull in an up to date list of packages first] > > exactly that did not work > apt-get dist-upgrade
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | <teamaster@mad-hatters-teatime.teanet.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-12-10 23:40 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <DsWIx-3L1-1@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #242923 |
On Fri, 10 Dec 2021 17:41:47 +0000 (GMT) Tim Woodall <debianuser@woodall.me.uk> wrote: > On Fri, 10 Dec 2021, teamaster@mad-hatters-teatime.teanet.org wrote: > > > On Thu, 9 Dec 2021 23:09:34 +0000 > > "Andrew M.A. Cater" <amacater@einval.com> wrote: > > > >> On Thu, Dec 09, 2021 at 11:58:33PM +0100, > >> teamaster@mad-hatters-teatime.teanet.org wrote: > >>> hey, > >>> i have not been using debian for long and not sure how to proceed > >>> here. is a: > >>> apt-get upgrade linux-image-amd64 > >>> the right way? > >>> ty, jens. > >> > >> apt-get update ; apt-get upgrade > >> > >> [You need to pull in an up to date list of packages first] > > > > exactly that did not work > > > > apt-get dist-upgrade > in 2 things i am pretty sure, my first mail only john doe read completely, and a dist-upgrade will not work with this non-standard-debian. see posting to john doe, problem solved
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Andrei POPESCU <andreimpopescu@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-12-11 00:00 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <DsX1V-3Sj-9@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #242930 |
[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw
On Vi, 10 dec 21, 23:39:30, teamaster@mad-hatters-teatime.teanet.org wrote: > > in 2 things i am pretty sure, my first mail only john doe read > completely, and a dist-upgrade will not work with this > non-standard-debian. Based on the limited information you provided in your mail `apt-get dist-upgrade` is a reasonable suggestion (even if my own preference would be `apt upgrade`, already mentioned by Greg). If for some reason `apt-get dist-upgrade` didn't work I'm very much interested to learn about it. > see posting to john doe, problem solved Good :) Kind regards, Andrei -- http://wiki.debian.org/FAQsFromDebianUser
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | <teamaster@mad-hatters-teatime.teanet.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-12-11 02:00 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <DsYU1-4Yz-3@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #242932 |
On Fri, 10 Dec 2021 23:57:44 +0100 Andrei POPESCU <andreimpopescu@gmail.com> wrote: > On Vi, 10 dec 21, 23:39:30, teamaster@mad-hatters-teatime.teanet.org > wrote: > > > > in 2 things i am pretty sure, my first mail only john doe read > > completely, and a dist-upgrade will not work with this > > non-standard-debian. > > Based on the limited information you provided in your mail > `apt-get dist-upgrade` is a reasonable suggestion (even if my own > preference would be `apt upgrade`, already mentioned by Greg). > > If for some reason `apt-get dist-upgrade` didn't work I'm very much > interested to learn about it. > > > see posting to john doe, problem solved > > Good :) > > Kind regards, > Andrei Sorry. yes, you are right. I had misunderstood another post. i am confused about debian package managment.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Andrei POPESCU <andreimpopescu@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-12-11 10:10 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <Dt6yd-1sX-1@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #242935 |
[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw
On Sb, 11 dec 21, 01:54:12, teamaster@mad-hatters-teatime.teanet.org wrote: > On Fri, 10 Dec 2021 23:57:44 +0100 > Andrei POPESCU <andreimpopescu@gmail.com> wrote: > > > On Vi, 10 dec 21, 23:39:30, teamaster@mad-hatters-teatime.teanet.org > > wrote: > > > > > > in 2 things i am pretty sure, my first mail only john doe read > > > completely, and a dist-upgrade will not work with this > > > non-standard-debian. > > > > Based on the limited information you provided in your mail > > `apt-get dist-upgrade` is a reasonable suggestion (even if my own > > preference would be `apt upgrade`, already mentioned by Greg). > > > > If for some reason `apt-get dist-upgrade` didn't work I'm very much > > interested to learn about it. > > > > > see posting to john doe, problem solved > > > > Good :) > > Sorry. > yes, you are right. > I had misunderstood another post. > i am confused about debian package managment. That's fine, we all had to learn :) Kernel packages change name over time to signal that modules (e.g. out-of-tree) must be recompiled for the newer kernel. As far as APT is concerned they are just different packages with some number in the name. The package linux-image-amd64 doesn't actually contain the kernel, it's purpose is to pull (depend on) the latest kernel. However, this requires installing an additional package. The command `apt-get upgrade` is only allowed to upgrade packages, not install or remove packages. The command `apt-get dist-upgrade` (named as such because it can *also* be used to upgrade to a newer distribution) is allowed to do both. Over time it became clear that allowing installation of new packages is generally safe and also necessary for day-to-day maintenance (like in this case, for kernel upgrades within the same distribution) so when the `apt` command was introduced the semantics of `upgrade` were adjusted[1]. The equivalent of `apt-get dist-upgrade` is `apt full-upgrade`[2] and is rarely (if ever) needed on a stable system. My general preference is to avoid using a bigger than necessary "hammer" (e.g. `apt-get dist-upgrade` instead of `apt upgrade`): it's a waste of energy and it increases the risk to hit your fingers ;) [1] `apt-get` is used in many scripts and higher level tools so it's commands must stay compatible. [2] arguably `full-upgrade` can be confusing as well, because it's used also for partial upgrades on testing or unstable systems. Hope this explains, Andrei -- http://wiki.debian.org/FAQsFromDebianUser
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Greg Wooledge <greg@wooledge.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-12-10 02:00 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <DsCqt-7Nx-1@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #242852 |
On Thu, Dec 09, 2021 at 11:58:33PM +0100, teamaster@mad-hatters-teatime.teanet.org wrote: > root@saira:~# apt-get upgrade > Reading package lists... Done > Building dependency tree > Reading state information... Done > Calculating upgrade... Done > The following packages have been kept back: > linux-image-amd64:amd64 > 0 upgraded, 0 newly installed, 0 to remove and 1 not upgraded. Pick any one of these (other commands may also work): apt-get dist-upgrade apt-get --with-new-pkgs upgrade apt upgrade apt-get install linux-image-amd64
[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]
Back to top | Article view | linux.debian.user
csiph-web