Subject: Bug#756816: apt: "apt-get upgrade packagename" should not set packagename to manually installed

From: David Kalnischkies <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 2 Aug 2014 12:20:48 +0200

Control: retitle -1 document "apt(-get) (dist-)upgrade pkga pkgb-"

On Sat, Aug 02, 2014 at 02:02:50AM +0200, Axel Beckert wrote:
> it seems that -- despite the documentation suggests otherwise -- you now
> can pass package names as parameter to "apt-get upgrade" and it does
> what you expect: Try to upgrade only that package.

No, they don't do that, at least it is not intended. (dist-)upgrade is
performed as usual, the packages you can provide are just hints. Imagine
a dist-upgrade which has to decide between A | B and chooses A, while
you prefer B. "apt-get dist-upgrade B" will take care of this – as well
as "apt-get dist-upgrade A-" in that case.

In the past you would have to either manually upgrade certain packages
earlier or set them on hold or something to make such a choice.

Michael (git d8a8f9d7) should have documented that though.

> But it also seems to set the given package to "manually installed" for
> which there is no reason at all:

Well, there is apts usual reason: If you care enough to mention the
package explicitly on the commandline, you properly don't want apt to
suggest its removal later on.

I can't say I am a huge fan of that, but it is at least very consistent
and avoids that the autoremoval is overagressive – or do I really want
it to remove my favorite shell because it isn't needed anymore? ;)

If you want to upgrade a 'single' package, "install" is for you (which
has the exact same behavior regarding the autobit).  Partial upgrades
tend to lead to disaster, so that we see no real point in exposing them
more directly – at least not in favor of more useful cases. An
interactive tool like aptitude can do that differently of course, but we
have only the commandline available for decision making…

Best regards

David Kalnischkies