Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]


Groups > linux.debian.user > #256383

Re: Buster => Bullseye: packages kept back

From Jesper Dybdal <jd-debian-user@dybdal.dk>
Newsgroups linux.debian.user
Subject Re: Buster => Bullseye: packages kept back
Date 2023-03-26 15:00 +0200
Message-ID <Gdy8x-fdm9-1@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink)
References <GduHD-fbmP-7@gated-at.bofh.it> <GdwzL-fcxS-1@gated-at.bofh.it>
Organization linux.* mail to news gateway

Show all headers | View raw


Thanks a lot for the responses.  I'm still in doubt as to what to do.

One thing I forgot to mention yesterday, but which I now think may be 
correlated with this problem, is that yesterday's upgrade mysteriously 
removed roundcube.  I have no idea why, and I want it back, but that is 
not particularly urgent.  I wonder if roundcube could have some 
dependencies that influence the other problem.

I have saved the responses to some of your suggested commands; they may 
not be interesting, but just in case, they are available at
     https://www.dybdal.dk/bullseye
with links in the text below.

On 2023-03-26 13:17, davidson wrote:
> On Sun, 26 Mar 2023 Jesper Dybdal wrote:
>> Yesterday, I upgraded Buster => Bullseye.
>
>   Release notes for Debian 11 (bullseye)
>   Upgrades from Debian 10 (buster) :: section 4.8 Obsolete Packages
> https://www.debian.org/releases/bullseye/amd64/release-notes/ch-upgrading.en.html#obsolete
>
>> This morning, I got a mail from unattended-upgrades, which said:
>>
>>> Packages with upgradable origin but kept back:
>>>   Debian stable:
>>>    guile-2.2-libs w3m
>>
>> and
>>
>>> Package guile-2.2-libs is kept back because a related package is
>>> kept back or due to local apt_preferences(5).
>>>
>>> Package w3m is kept back because a related package is kept back or
>>> due to local apt_preferences(5).
>>
>> What does this mean?
>
> My guess is that you have packages from Buster still installed, which
> are now obsolete (ie, not packaged for Bullseye). I speculate that
> these obsolete packages depend on guile-2.2-libs and w3m, and that
> this somehow (*waves hands around vaguely*) causes guile-2.2-libs and
> w3m to be held back.
>
> I "guess" and "speculate", and I confess I don't really know.
>
> (But in the remainder of my reply, I foolishly pretend that I do.)
>
>> I have what I believe to be a clean install, I have never used
>> apt_preferences,
>
> The message says
>
>   ...because a related package is kept back OR due to local
>   apt_preferences(5).
>
> That is, kept back (for whatever reason), OR because of
> apt_preferences. It need not have anything to do with apt_preferences.
>
>> and until now, I had never heard of guile or w3m.
>
>  $ apt-cache show guile-2.2-libs w3m
>
>> And I don't quite understand why I have them installed at all.
>
>  $ apt-mark showauto | grep -xE 'guile-2.2-libs|w3m'
>
> If they show up in the output of "apt-mark showauto", they were
> automatically installed (I'd guess in order to satisfy dependencies,
> recommends, etc)

guile-2.2-libs do show up, w3m does not.
Response in https://www.dybdal.dk/bullseye/apt-mark-show-auto.txt

>
>> My sources.list contains only bullseye and bullseye-backports.
>
> Today it does.
>
> But the day before yesterday, I gather it was Buster's Last Stand.
Indeed.  And at that time, sources.list contained just buster and 
buster-backports.

>
>> What do I do?
>
> Two options come to mind.
>
> FIRST OPTION:
>
>> From the section of the Bullseye release notes I linked above...
>
>   Some package management front-ends provide easy ways of finding
>   installed packages that are no longer available from any known
>   repository. The aptitude textual user interface lists them in the
>   category “Obsolete and Locally Created Packages”, and they can be
>   listed and purged from the commandline with:
>
>      # aptitude search '~o'
>      # aptitude purge '~o'
>
> I guess you could try that search command above, first. And then if
> you don't care about purging the obsolete packages it lists, then I
> guess you could purge them, to see if that permits you to upgrade
> these two packages that you never knew you had installed, and never
> explicitly asked for.
The search command gives a list of 108 packages, which I'm somewhat 
reluctant to purge.
Output in https://www.dybdal.dk/bullseye/aptitude-search-obsolete.txt

>
> SECOND OPTION:
>
> Since you have no explicit desire for either w3m or guile-2.2-libs,
> you could pretend to remove them, and see what your package manager
> thinks that entails.
>
> With apt-get, I would do
>
>  $ apt-get -Vs remove w3m

That gives a list of 129 packages that "were automatically installed and 
are no longer required" but  as I understand it, it will remove only 
w3m, not those 129 packages.
Output in https://www.dybdal.dk/bullseye/apt-get-Vs-remove-w3m.txt

> and
>
>  $ apt-get -Vs guile-2.2-libs
That gives first a list of 134 packages, and then:
The following packages will be REMOVED:
    guile-2.2-libs (2.2.7+1-6)
    libmailutils7 (1:3.10-3+b1)
    mailutils (1:3.10-3+b1)

I am not quite certain that I do not use or will use mailutils.
Output in https://www.dybdal.dk/bullseye/apt-get-Vs-remove-guile.txt

>
> The -s makes it just for pretend, and the -V makes the packages apt
> threatens to remove show up in a nice column, instead jammed into one
> long hard-to-read row.
>
> If the removals don't look threatening to you, you know what to do.
>
> And if they do look threatening to you, then don't do it for real!
>
>> apt list says:
>>> guile-2.2-libs/stable 2.2.7+1-6 amd64 [upgradable from: 
>>> 2.2.4+1-2+deb10u1]
>>> guile-2.2-libs/now 2.2.4+1-2+deb10u1 amd64 [installed,upgradable to: 
>>> 2.2.7+1-6]
>>>
>>> w3m/stable 0.5.3+git20210102-6 amd64 [upgradable from: 0.5.3-37]
>>> w3m/now 0.5.3-37 amd64 [installed,upgradable to: 0.5.3+git20210102-6]
>
> I notice that the installed versions listed above are in buster. This
> seems consistent with them being dependencies of buster packages that
> are now obsolete in bullseye.
>

I'm leaning towards removing those packages.  And when I lose mailutils, 
then I can reinstall it when I need it.
But perhaps I will try to install the lost roundcube again first, and 
see if it changes the state.

Does that sound sensible?

Again thanks for your help,
Jesper

-- 
Jesper Dybdal
https://www.dybdal.dk

Back to linux.debian.user | Previous | NextPrevious in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread


Thread

Buster => Bullseye: packages kept back Jesper Dybdal <jd-debian-user@dybdal.dk> - 2023-03-26 11:20 +0200
  Re: Buster => Bullseye: packages kept back Jeffrey Walton <noloader@gmail.com> - 2023-03-26 11:30 +0200
  Re: Buster => Bullseye: packages kept back davidson <davidson@freevolt.org> - 2023-03-26 13:20 +0200
    Re: Buster => Bullseye: packages kept back Jesper Dybdal <jd-debian-user@dybdal.dk> - 2023-03-26 15:00 +0200
      Re: Buster => Bullseye: packages kept back davidson <davidson@freevolt.org> - 2023-03-27 11:10 +0200
        Re: Buster => Bullseye: packages kept back Jesper Dybdal <jd-debian-user@dybdal.dk> - 2023-03-27 11:30 +0200
          Re: Buster => Bullseye: packages kept back David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2023-03-27 16:50 +0200
          Re: Buster => Bullseye: packages kept back davidson <davidson@freevolt.org> - 2023-03-28 11:00 +0200
            Re: Buster => Bullseye: packages kept back Jesper Dybdal <jd-debian-user@dybdal.dk> - 2023-03-28 12:30 +0200
        Re: Buster => Bullseye: packages kept back Jesper Dybdal <jd-debian-user@dybdal.dk> - 2023-03-27 16:50 +0200
  Re: Buster => Bullseye: packages kept back Cindy Sue Causey <butterflybytes@gmail.com> - 2023-03-26 17:40 +0200
    Re: Buster => Bullseye: packages kept back Jesper Dybdal <jd-debian-user@dybdal.dk> - 2023-03-26 19:30 +0200
  Re: Buster => Bullseye: packages kept back David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2023-03-26 20:20 +0200
    Re: Buster => Bullseye: packages kept back Jesper Dybdal <jd-debian-user@dybdal.dk> - 2023-03-27 00:30 +0200
  Re: Buster => Bullseye: packages kept back Jeffrey Walton <noloader@gmail.com> - 2023-03-26 23:20 +0200
    Re: Buster => Bullseye: packages kept back Jesper Dybdal <jd-debian-user@dybdal.dk> - 2023-03-27 00:30 +0200
      Re: Buster => Bullseye: packages kept back Vincent Lefevre <vincent@vinc17.net> - 2023-03-27 13:30 +0200
        Re: Buster => Bullseye: packages kept back Greg Wooledge <greg@wooledge.org> - 2023-03-27 13:50 +0200
          Re: Buster => Bullseye: packages kept back Vincent Lefevre <vincent@vinc17.net> - 2023-03-27 14:20 +0200
            Re: Buster => Bullseye: packages kept back Greg Wooledge <greg@wooledge.org> - 2023-03-27 14:30 +0200
          Re: Buster => Bullseye: packages kept back Dan Ritter <dsr@randomstring.org> - 2023-03-27 15:10 +0200
            Re: Buster => Bullseye: packages kept back Nicolas George <george@nsup.org> - 2023-03-27 15:20 +0200
              Re: Buster => Bullseye: packages kept back gene heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> - 2023-03-27 16:10 +0200
                Re: Buster => Bullseye: packages kept back <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2023-03-27 17:40 +0200
                Re: Buster => Bullseye: packages kept back gene heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> - 2023-03-27 20:10 +0200
                Re: Buster => Bullseye: packages kept back <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2023-03-28 07:10 +0200
                Re: Buster => Bullseye: packages kept back gene heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> - 2023-03-28 17:10 +0200
                alternative views of PNG (was Re: Buster => Bullseye: packages kept  back) davidson <davidson@freevolt.org> - 2023-03-28 13:00 +0200
                Re: alternative views of PNG (was Re: Buster => Bullseye: packages  keptback) gene heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> - 2023-03-28 17:40 +0200
                Re: alternative views of PNG (was Re: Buster => Bullseye: packages  keptback) gene heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> - 2023-03-28 18:50 +0200
                Re: alternative views of PNG (was Re: Buster => Bullseye: packages  keptback) <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2023-03-28 20:00 +0200
                Re: alternative views of PNG (was Re: Buster => Bullseye: packages  keptback) <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2023-03-28 20:00 +0200
                Re: alternative views of PNG (was Re: Buster => Bullseye: packages  keptback) davidson <davidson@freevolt.org> - 2023-03-29 09:30 +0200
              Re: Buster => Bullseye: packages kept back Vincent Lefevre <vincent@vinc17.net> - 2023-04-03 13:50 +0200
            Re: Buster => Bullseye: packages kept back Greg Wooledge <greg@wooledge.org> - 2023-03-27 16:10 +0200
              Re: Buster => Bullseye: packages kept back davidson <davidson@freevolt.org> - 2023-03-28 08:30 +0200
                apt colored output (was Re: Buster => Bullseye: packages kept  back) davidson <davidson@freevolt.org> - 2023-04-03 08:00 +0200
      Re: Buster => Bullseye: packages kept back Anssi Saari <as@sci.fi> - 2023-03-28 11:30 +0200

csiph-web