Let us say that I install a package with apt-get. Somewhere it records that fact, and remembers what it put where. If I build and install a package by hand, apt doesn't really know about it. Likewise on a system that uses yum or pacman, they each remember their actions.
Yum, apt and pacman cant really track each other, so it is dangerous to install two on one system.
So here is my question: where does apt-get log the changes it makes to my system? Bonus points for showing how pacman does it differently. I can always ask that at the arch forums.
Nerds that build or deploy
also give overview information on what has been installed.
VSIDO | Words That Build Or Destroy
We do not run from challenges, they become new innovations within VSIDO!
Thanks, I knew about those. Logs seem to be more intended for human eyes. I wasn't trying to waste your time with an easy question like that. But I guess that you two did says something about the helpfulness of the forumites. Thanks.
Those logs feature duplicate entries if you install, remove and re-install packages. I imagine it would be very fussy(and eventually time consuming) for apt and dpkg to use those for its personal book keeping.
Further, they seem more overviews than records of particular details. For example, if leafpad depends on a shared object also used by geany, and I remove geany, apt knows to leave that library alone; something else depends on it. Where does apt/dpkg store than info? That is what I am after.
Last edited by AlanD (2012-11-14 20:22:56)
Nerds that build or deploy
There are so many logs and they are usually stored in /var/log, I think we just need the correct terminology but then I do not really bother with logs. Just take a look into that directory and see what you find.
apt-cache depends <package>
e.g. shows you the dependencies of a specific package even recommends.
Maybe you should consider to take a look into the Debian documentation, something like the Debian Administrator Handbook, you can install that too if you are on Waldorf.
Personally I use only apt and I use it for everything related to Debian's package management and to administer my system.
Last edited by ivanovnegro (2012-11-14 21:06:56)
dpkg works with local files, APT first downloads the cache and uses dpkg mechanism to 'install' the packages from the cache via a download/media. dpkg is 'just' a part of APT (which could also be aptitude or wajig)
If you want to see the differences, check a pkgbuild file in Arch (contains info on how to build a package) and extract a .deb (contains the tree how it is copied to your computer together with a control file) with an archiver program
The Control file in the .deb package is where the package manager gets its info from: dependencies, architecture, breaks, etc.
All you need to know is in /var/lib/dpkg