greets!
I just did a dist-upgrade (to R14 Jessie; exegnu) somewhat incorrectly, it made a lot of changes I hadn't intended but that's user error for the most part. one error was not filtering out stuff I consider junk, for instance 'games'.
I thought I'd try purging them the so-called easy way using kpackage but when I get set to remove kdegames-trinity, it _looks_ like tde-trinity will go along it. I know this has to do with 'meta-packages' but I don't understand the implications.
one gets the same result from apt-get.
I'm happy, happier in fact, to do all of this using apt-get (or aptitude). I'd love a magical incantation or rather guidance on how to formulate one to remove this junk:
games edutainment education science
f.
On Friday 26 December 2014 10:32:50 pm you wrote:
greets!
I just did a dist-upgrade (to R14 Jessie; exegnu) somewhat incorrectly, it made a lot of changes I hadn't intended but that's user error for the most part. one error was not filtering out stuff I consider junk, for instance 'games'.
I thought I'd try purging them the so-called easy way using kpackage but when I get set to remove kdegames-trinity, it _looks_ like tde-trinity will go along it. I know this has to do with 'meta-packages' but I don't understand the implications.
one gets the same result from apt-get.
I'm happy, happier in fact, to do all of this using apt-get (or aptitude). I'd love a magical incantation or rather guidance on how to formulate one to remove this junk:
games edutainment education science
f.
The meta-package 'tde-trinity' includes quite a few other 'meta--packages' as depends. Use 'apt-cache depends tde-trinity' to view them.
You can safely remove 'meta-packages'...start with 'tde-trinity' since it pulls in a 'full' TDE desktop enviroment.
For a slim install I start with 'tdebase-trinity' , and add as needed.
On Sat, 27 Dec 2014, Greg Madden wrote:
On Friday 26 December 2014 10:32:50 pm you wrote:
greets!
I just did a dist-upgrade (to R14 Jessie; exegnu) somewhat incorrectly, it made a lot of changes I hadn't intended but that's user error for the most part. one error was not filtering out stuff I consider junk, for instance 'games'.
I thought I'd try purging them the so-called easy way using kpackage but when I get set to remove kdegames-trinity, it _looks_ like tde-trinity will go along it. I know this has to do with 'meta-packages' but I don't understand the implications.
one gets the same result from apt-get.
I'm happy, happier in fact, to do all of this using apt-get (or aptitude). I'd love a magical incantation or rather guidance on how to formulate one to remove this junk:
games edutainment education science
f.
The meta-package 'tde-trinity' includes quite a few other 'meta--packages' as depends. Use 'apt-cache depends tde-trinity' to view them.
You can safely remove 'meta-packages'...start with 'tde-trinity' since it pulls in a 'full' TDE desktop enviroment.
so this is precisely what I don't understand. if so much depends on a meta-package, how can it be safe to remove the meta-package? there are dependencies here that I definitely do not want to remove. does removal of a meta-package leave the dependent apps intact?
For a slim install I start with 'tdebase-trinity' , and add as needed.
this was intended to be an upgrade, not a fresh install. in fact, after some fumbling, it worked and I have the apps I used to have though I had to apt-get a couple of times for fresher versions.
Felmon Davis composed on 2014-12-27 13:33 (UTC-0500):
You can safely remove 'meta-packages'...start with 'tde-trinity' since it pulls in a 'full' TDE desktop enviroment.
so this is precisely what I don't understand. if so much depends on a meta-package, how can it be safe to remove the meta-package? there are dependencies here that I definitely do not want to remove. does removal of a meta-package leave the dependent apps intact?
Meta-packages decide what gets added to or included in an installation. Choosing to remove one removes it only.
On Sat, 27 Dec 2014, Felix Miata wrote:
Felmon Davis composed on 2014-12-27 13:33 (UTC-0500):
You can safely remove 'meta-packages'...start with 'tde-trinity' since it pulls in a 'full' TDE desktop enviroment.
so this is precisely what I don't understand. if so much depends on a meta-package, how can it be safe to remove the meta-package? there are dependencies here that I definitely do not want to remove. does removal of a meta-package leave the dependent apps intact?
Meta-packages decide what gets added to or included in an installation. Choosing to remove one removes it only.
alright then, I'll have a go.
you don't know me but I remember you from OS/2 days. best regards from then and now!
F.
On 12/26/2014 11:32 PM, Felmon Davis wrote:
I thought I'd try purging them the so-called easy way using kpackage but when I get set to remove kdegames-trinity, it _looks_ like tde-trinity will go along it. I know this has to do with 'meta-packages' but I don't understand the implications.
What I do is, first make sure there are no autoremovable packages. Then remove the metapackage. Then look at the packages that are now autoremovable, and mark anything you want to keep as manually installed. Then autoremove the rest.
Date: Sat, 27 Dec 2014 16:19:20 -0800 From: dan@homestead-products.com To: trinity-users@lists.pearsoncomputing.net Subject: Re: [trinity-users] removing games and other cruff.
On 12/26/2014 11:32 PM, Felmon Davis wrote:
I thought I'd try purging them the so-called easy way using kpackage but when I get set to remove kdegames-trinity, it _looks_ like tde-trinity will go along it. I know this has to do with 'meta-packages' but I don't understand the implications.
What I do is, first make sure there are no autoremovable packages. Then remove the metapackage. Then look at the packages that are now autoremovable, and mark anything you want to keep as manually installed. Then autoremove the rest.
Hi,
If you want to use Synaptic, it will tell you which package would be removed if you proceed to remove the metapackage. If it makes sense for you, click on okay and if it wants to remove tons of packages, then something went wrong in packaging...
Hope it helps! -Alexandre
On Sat, 27 Dec 2014, Alexandre wrote:
Date: Sat, 27 Dec 2014 16:19:20 -0800 From: dan@homestead-products.com To: trinity-users@lists.pearsoncomputing.net Subject: Re: [trinity-users] removing games and other cruff.
On 12/26/2014 11:32 PM, Felmon Davis wrote:
I thought I'd try purging them the so-called easy way using kpackage but when I get set to remove kdegames-trinity, it _looks_ like tde-trinity will go along it. I know this has to do with 'meta-packages' but I don't understand the implications.
What I do is, first make sure there are no autoremovable packages. Then remove the metapackage. Then look at the packages that are now autoremovable, and mark anything you want to keep as manually installed. Then autoremove the rest.
Hi,
If you want to use Synaptic, it will tell you which package would be removed if you proceed to remove the metapackage. If it makes sense for you, click on okay and if it wants to remove tons of packages, then something went wrong in packaging...
I'd rather not use synaptic actually but I'll have a look. kpackage showed the same set of dependencies on metapackages that was the reason for my question.
I think I have the answer to the question now though. plus now if something goes wrong, I can blame you guys!
<g>
F.
Hope it helps! -Alexandre
On Sunday 28 December 2014 01:46:29 Felmon Davis wrote:
On Sat, 27 Dec 2014, Alexandre wrote:
Date: Sat, 27 Dec 2014 16:19:20 -0800 From: dan@homestead-products.com To: trinity-users@lists.pearsoncomputing.net Subject: Re: [trinity-users] removing games and other cruff.
On 12/26/2014 11:32 PM, Felmon Davis wrote:
I thought I'd try purging them the so-called easy way using kpackage but when I get set to remove kdegames-trinity, it _looks_ like tde-trinity will go along it. I know this has to do with 'meta-packages' but I don't understand the implications.
What I do is, first make sure there are no autoremovable packages. Then remove the metapackage. Then look at the packages that are now autoremovable, and mark anything you want to keep as manually installed. Then autoremove the rest.
Hi,
If you want to use Synaptic, it will tell you which package would be removed if you proceed to remove the metapackage. If it makes sense for you, click on okay and if it wants to remove tons of packages, then something went wrong in packaging...
I'd rather not use synaptic actually but I'll have a look. kpackage showed the same set of dependencies on metapackages that was the reason for my question.
aptitude gives you the same information and the chance to alter it. So, no doubt, does apt-get.
It isn't that "something went wrong in packaging". It is that it and you don't agree! But you can get round it as others have suggested.
Though, I must say it does seem odd that TDE should depend on kdegames!!!
Lisi
I think I have the answer to the question now though. plus now if something goes wrong, I can blame you guys!
<g>
F.
Hope it helps! -Alexandre
On Sat, 27 Dec 2014, Dan Youngquist wrote:
On 12/26/2014 11:32 PM, Felmon Davis wrote:
I thought I'd try purging them the so-called easy way using kpackage but when I get set to remove kdegames-trinity, it _looks_ like tde-trinity will go along it. I know this has to do with 'meta-packages' but I don't understand the implications.
What I do is, first make sure there are no autoremovable packages. Then remove the metapackage. Then look at the packages that are now autoremovable, and mark anything you want to keep as manually installed. Then autoremove the rest.
don't know how the marking as manually installed is done but I can look it up.
thanks.
f.
On Sat, 27 Dec 2014, Dan Youngquist wrote:
On 12/26/2014 11:32 PM, Felmon Davis wrote:
I thought I'd try purging them the so-called easy way using kpackage but when I get set to remove kdegames-trinity, it _looks_ like tde-trinity will go along it. I know this has to do with 'meta-packages' but I don't understand the implications.
What I do is, first make sure there are no autoremovable packages. Then remove the metapackage. Then look at the packages that are now autoremovable, and mark anything you want to keep as manually installed. Then autoremove the rest.
so here's an example. I do:
sudo apt-get remove korn-trinity
and I get a whole list of stuff to autoremove. I've included it after my signature. some of this stuff I want to retain.
I have restored korn-trinity pending further illumination.
F.
On 12/27/2014 06:30 PM, Felmon Davis wrote:
so here's an example. I do:
sudo apt-get remove korn-trinity
and I get a whole list of stuff to autoremove. I've included it after my signature. some of this stuff I want to retain.
Using Synaptic, you'd select any you want to keep, go to the Package menu, and uncheck "Automatically installed". Or if you prefer, you can use apt-mark to mark them as manually installed (see man apt-mark).
On Sat, 27 Dec 2014, Dan Youngquist wrote:
On 12/27/2014 06:30 PM, Felmon Davis wrote:
so here's an example. I do:
sudo apt-get remove korn-trinity
and I get a whole list of stuff to autoremove. I've included it after my signature. some of this stuff I want to retain.
Using Synaptic, you'd select any you want to keep, go to the Package menu, and uncheck "Automatically installed". Or if you prefer, you can use apt-mark to mark them as manually installed (see man apt-mark).
found the 'man' on 'apt-mark' a bit obscure but this is a great tip so I'll be exploring it.
everyone's referencing 'synaptic'; is it considered superior to 'kpackage'?
I prefer the 'apt-get'/'aptitude' in general but will use whatever does the job effectively.
F.
On Saturday 27 December 2014 8:58:38 pm you wrote:
On Sat, 27 Dec 2014, Dan Youngquist wrote:
On 12/27/2014 06:30 PM, Felmon Davis wrote:
so here's an example. I do:
sudo apt-get remove korn-trinity
and I get a whole list of stuff to autoremove. I've included it after my signature. some of this stuff I want to retain.
Using Synaptic, you'd select any you want to keep, go to the Package menu, and uncheck "Automatically installed". Or if you prefer, you can use apt-mark to mark them as manually installed (see man apt-mark).
found the 'man' on 'apt-mark' a bit obscure but this is a great tip so I'll be exploring it.
everyone's referencing 'synaptic'; is it considered superior to 'kpackage'?
I prefer the 'apt-get'/'aptitude' in general but will use whatever does the job effectively.
F.
Not sure what OS exegnu is based on...
I use Debian, the cli tools, imho, are superior to any gui app..some time you need to repair a system without X getting involved.
I keep learning more about the cli, apt-mark is new to me, apt-cache has lots of useful options...you can answer alot of your own questions with these tools. The key s knowing what they are.
On Sat, 27 Dec 2014, Greg Madden wrote:
On Saturday 27 December 2014 8:58:38 pm you wrote:
On Sat, 27 Dec 2014, Dan Youngquist wrote:
On 12/27/2014 06:30 PM, Felmon Davis wrote:
so here's an example. I do:
sudo apt-get remove korn-trinity
and I get a whole list of stuff to autoremove. I've included it after my signature. some of this stuff I want to retain.
Using Synaptic, you'd select any you want to keep, go to the Package menu, and uncheck "Automatically installed". Or if you prefer, you can use apt-mark to mark them as manually installed (see man apt-mark).
found the 'man' on 'apt-mark' a bit obscure but this is a great tip so I'll be exploring it.
everyone's referencing 'synaptic'; is it considered superior to 'kpackage'?
I prefer the 'apt-get'/'aptitude' in general but will use whatever does the job effectively.
F.
Not sure what OS exegnu is based on...
I use Debian, the cli tools, imho, are superior to any gui app..some time you need to repair a system without X getting involved.
I don't like clicking around on a gui either. for one thing, I find scrolling around clumsy and it all seems kind of unnecessarily indirect: if I know the words, why use pictures?
I keep learning more about the cli, apt-mark is new to me, apt-cache has lots of useful options...you can answer alot of your own questions with these tools. The key s knowing what they are.
indeed. one has to know the words (= commands).
having an 'interesting' time with this upgrade though....
F.
On 12/28/2014 04:01 PM, Felmon Davis wrote:
On Sat, 27 Dec 2014, Greg Madden wrote:
On Saturday 27 December 2014 8:58:38 pm you wrote:
On Sat, 27 Dec 2014, Dan Youngquist wrote:
On 12/27/2014 06:30 PM, Felmon Davis wrote:
so here's an example. I do:
sudo apt-get remove korn-trinity
and I get a whole list of stuff to autoremove. I've included it after my signature. some of this stuff I want to retain.
Using Synaptic, you'd select any you want to keep, go to the Package menu, and uncheck "Automatically installed". Or if you prefer, you can use apt-mark to mark them as manually installed (see man apt-mark).
found the 'man' on 'apt-mark' a bit obscure but this is a great tip so I'll be exploring it.
everyone's referencing 'synaptic'; is it considered superior to 'kpackage'?
I prefer the 'apt-get'/'aptitude' in general but will use whatever does the job effectively.
F.
Not sure what OS exegnu is based on...
I use Debian, the cli tools, imho, are superior to any gui app..some time you need to repair a system without X getting involved.
I don't like clicking around on a gui either. for one thing, I find scrolling around clumsy and it all seems kind of unnecessarily indirect: if I know the words, why use pictures?
I keep learning more about the cli, apt-mark is new to me, apt-cache has lots of useful options...you can answer alot of your own questions with these tools. The key s knowing what they are.
indeed. one has to know the words (= commands).
having an 'interesting' time with this upgrade though....
F.
if I know the words, why use pictures?
........if I know the pictures, why use words ? grin grin
On Sunday 28 December 2014 09:39:22 Tony Wolfs wrote:
On 12/28/2014 04:01 PM, Felmon Davis wrote:
On Sat, 27 Dec 2014, Greg Madden wrote:
On Saturday 27 December 2014 8:58:38 pm you wrote:
On Sat, 27 Dec 2014, Dan Youngquist wrote:
On 12/27/2014 06:30 PM, Felmon Davis wrote:
so here's an example. I do:
sudo apt-get remove korn-trinity
and I get a whole list of stuff to autoremove. I've included it after my signature. some of this stuff I want to retain.
Using Synaptic, you'd select any you want to keep, go to the Package menu, and uncheck "Automatically installed". Or if you prefer, you can use apt-mark to mark them as manually installed (see man apt-mark).
found the 'man' on 'apt-mark' a bit obscure but this is a great tip so I'll be exploring it.
everyone's referencing 'synaptic'; is it considered superior to 'kpackage'?
I prefer the 'apt-get'/'aptitude' in general but will use whatever does the job effectively.
F.
Not sure what OS exegnu is based on...
I use Debian, the cli tools, imho, are superior to any gui app..some time you need to repair a system without X getting involved.
I don't like clicking around on a gui either. for one thing, I find scrolling around clumsy and it all seems kind of unnecessarily indirect: if I know the words, why use pictures?
I keep learning more about the cli, apt-mark is new to me, apt-cache has lots of useful options...you can answer alot of your own questions with these tools. The key s knowing what they are.
indeed. one has to know the words (= commands).
having an 'interesting' time with this upgrade though....
F.
if I know the words, why use pictures?
........if I know the pictures, why use words ? grin grin
Why do GUI users always feel the need to brow-beat, cajole or otherwise push everyone into using the GUI? ;-) Each to his own!
Lisi
On Sun, 28 Dec 2014, Lisi Reisz wrote:
On Sunday 28 December 2014 09:39:22 Tony Wolfs wrote:
........if I know the pictures, why use words ? grin grin
Why do GUI users always feel the need to brow-beat, cajole or otherwise push everyone into using the GUI? ;-) Each to his own!
Lisi
Tony is just joking. I'm sure that at tea time he doesn't pull out a picture book!
and that's part of the serious point. if I know what I want, I can just say it (= type the command). even if I know the meaning of the pretty pictures, I have start the app, click around, drop down a menu, scroll here or there, blah, blah.
but yes, chacun a son gout or whatever. and sometimes the picture way is better, for instance, sorting a bunch of thumbnail files.
F.
On Sunday 28 December 2014 10:33:47 Felmon Davis wrote:
On Sun, 28 Dec 2014, Lisi Reisz wrote:
On Sunday 28 December 2014 09:39:22 Tony Wolfs wrote:
........if I know the pictures, why use words ? grin grin
Why do GUI users always feel the need to brow-beat, cajole or otherwise push everyone into using the GUI? ;-) Each to his own!
Lisi
Tony is just joking. I'm sure that at tea time he doesn't pull out a picture book!
No, I know. And it wasn't aimed just at Tony. In fact, it wasn't aimed primarily at Tony.
But I was making a serious point too. Sometimes the CLI is faster and more efficient. Sometimes it is just different. But I will concede there are times when the GUI is much safer. Here is a good example of what I mean: something that is very fast and (too) easy on the CLI - and much safer on the GUI!
# rm -r /*
Lisi
On Sunday 28 December 2014 11.51:22 Lisi Reisz wrote:
But I was making a serious point too. Sometimes the CLI is faster and more efficient. Sometimes it is just different. But I will concede there are times when the GUI is much safer. Here is a good example of what I mean: something that is very fast and (too) easy on the CLI - and much safer on the GUI!
# rm -r /*
Lisi
Being a user of both - and having to help a lot of *basic* users (no harm meant, just a truth) the central point is "if you know the words".
To use cli you need not only to know the words, but their sequence. Add to that that (often) you can get a lot done (including damage) without getting a warning...
I tend to prefer cli for what I know well how to do (partitioning is a good example) but GUI for what I don't master (stupidly, creating a symbolic link. I never remember the right sequence).
What's stupid is that "modern" OS (Windows or MacOS) have labeled cli as "complicated" and "old fashioned", just as a verbose startup. Only those who understand how their system starts (which excludes most users of previously mentionned OSes) know how usefull all this verbosity is.
Thierry
On Sunday 28 December 2014 11.51:22 Lisi Reisz wrote:
But I was making a serious point too. Sometimes the CLI is faster and more efficient. Sometimes it is just different. But I will concede there are times when the GUI is much safer. Here is a good example of what I mean: something that is very fast and (too) easy on the CLI - and much safer on the GUI!
# rm -r /*
Lisi
Being a user of both - and having to help a lot of *basic* users (no harm meant, just a truth) the central point is "if you know the words".
To use cli you need not only to know the words, but their sequence. Add to that that (often) you can get a lot done (including damage) without getting a warning...
Good point!
I tend to prefer cli for what I know well how to do (partitioning is a good example) but GUI for what I don't master (stupidly, creating a symbolic link. I never remember the right sequence).
What's stupid is that "modern" OS (Windows or MacOS) have labeled cli as "complicated" and "old fashioned", just as a verbose startup. Only those who understand how their system starts (which excludes most users of previously mentionned OSes) know how usefull all this verbosity is.
Thierry
Hi,
What I'm trying to do is to help users by providing tips on tools that I am comfortable with and that I know how to use. Would you prefer that I give false tips for using tools that I am not comfortable with just to satisfy your taste for CLI Lisi?
-Alexandre
On Sun, 28 Dec 2014, Alexandre wrote:
On Sunday 28 December 2014 11.51:22 Lisi Reisz wrote:
But I was making a serious point too. Sometimes the CLI is faster and more efficient. Sometimes it is just different. But I will concede there are times when the GUI is much safer. Here is a good example of what I mean: something that is very fast and (too) easy on the CLI - and much safer on the GUI!
# rm -r /*
Lisi
Being a user of both - and having to help a lot of *basic* users (no harm meant, just a truth) the central point is "if you know the words".
To use cli you need not only to know the words, but their sequence. Add to that that (often) you can get a lot done (including damage) without getting a warning...
Good point!
I tend to prefer cli for what I know well how to do (partitioning is a good example) but GUI for what I don't master (stupidly, creating a symbolic link. I never remember the right sequence).
What's stupid is that "modern" OS (Windows or MacOS) have labeled cli as "complicated" and "old fashioned", just as a verbose startup. Only those who understand how their system starts (which excludes most users of previously mentionned OSes) know how usefull all this verbosity is.
Thierry
Hi,
What I'm trying to do is to help users by providing tips on tools that I am comfortable with and that I know how to use. Would you prefer that I give false tips for using tools that I am not comfortable with just to satisfy your taste for CLI Lisi?
-Alexandre
not sure I understand the point of the question you are posing but I tend to think the issue raised in this digression is settled:
(a) some generally prefer cli, some generally prefer gui. (b) cli has advantages for some purposes, gui has advantages for some purposes.
at this level of generality not sure much more is to be said. (a) seems indisputable. there are totalitarians but most concede the general point about (b) but may disagree about where the advantages lie. but that gets into specifics.
maybe also off-topic.
F.
On Sunday 28 December 2014 13:55:50 Thierry de Coulon wrote:
On Sunday 28 December 2014 11.51:22 Lisi Reisz wrote:
But I was making a serious point too. Sometimes the CLI is faster and more efficient. Sometimes it is just different. But I will concede there are times when the GUI is much safer. Here is a good example of what I mean: something that is very fast and (too) easy on the CLI - and much safer on the GUI!
# rm -r /*
Lisi
Being a user of both - and having to help a lot of *basic* users (no harm meant, just a truth) the central point is "if you know the words".
To use cli you need not only to know the words, but their sequence. Add to that that (often) you can get a lot done (including damage) without getting a warning...
I tend to prefer cli for what I know well how to do (partitioning is a good example) but GUI for what I don't master (stupidly, creating a symbolic link. I never remember the right sequence).
What's stupid is that "modern" OS (Windows or MacOS) have labeled cli as "complicated" and "old fashioned", just as a verbose startup. Only those who understand how their system starts (which excludes most users of previously mentionned OSes) know how usefull all this verbosity is.
Well put. And for something quick and simple the GUI can even be faster if one is already in it and would have to change to the CLI.
Lisi
On Sunday 28 December 2014 1:51:22 am you wrote:
On Sunday 28 December 2014 10:33:47 Felmon Davis wrote:
On Sun, 28 Dec 2014, Lisi Reisz wrote:
On Sunday 28 December 2014 09:39:22 Tony Wolfs wrote:
........if I know the pictures, why use words ? grin grin
Why do GUI users always feel the need to brow-beat, cajole or otherwise push everyone into using the GUI? ;-) Each to his own!
Lisi
Tony is just joking. I'm sure that at tea time he doesn't pull out a picture book!
No, I know. And it wasn't aimed just at Tony. In fact, it wasn't aimed primarily at Tony.
But I was making a serious point too. Sometimes the CLI is faster and more efficient. Sometimes it is just different. But I will concede there are times when the GUI is much safer. Here is a good example of what I mean: something that is very fast and (too) easy on the CLI - and much safer on the GUI!
# rm -r /*
Lisi
my example is drag n drop file management in a gui , I usually do not do this, I have 'accidently' dropped a file and it takes to long find it :-) '
krusader et al are compelling though.
On Sunday 28 December 2014 08:22:08 Greg Madden wrote:
On Saturday 27 December 2014 8:58:38 pm you wrote:
On Sat, 27 Dec 2014, Dan Youngquist wrote:
On 12/27/2014 06:30 PM, Felmon Davis wrote:
so here's an example. I do:
sudo apt-get remove korn-trinity
and I get a whole list of stuff to autoremove. I've included it after my signature. some of this stuff I want to retain.
Using Synaptic, you'd select any you want to keep, go to the Package menu, and uncheck "Automatically installed". Or if you prefer, you can use apt-mark to mark them as manually installed (see man apt-mark).
found the 'man' on 'apt-mark' a bit obscure but this is a great tip so I'll be exploring it.
everyone's referencing 'synaptic'; is it considered superior to 'kpackage'?
I prefer the 'apt-get'/'aptitude' in general but will use whatever does the job effectively.
F.
Not sure what OS exegnu is based on...
Debian.
I use Debian, the cli tools, imho, are superior to any gui app..some time you need to repair a system without X getting involved.
Hear, hear.
I keep learning more about the cli, apt-mark is new to me, apt-cache has lots of useful options...you can answer alot of your own questions with these tools. The key s knowing what they are.
Agreed!
Lisi
-
Alexandre -
Dan Youngquist -
Felix Miata -
Felmon Davis -
Greg Madden -
Lisi Reisz -
Thierry de Coulon -
Tony Wolfs