[R-sig-Debian] [FORGED] r-base is already the newest version (3.5.2-1bionic)

[George N. White III]

On Tue, 29 Jan 2019 at 22:36, Dirk Eddelbuettel <edd using debian.org> wrote:

>
> Rolf,
>
> Briefly as I don't have sufficient time to catch up on all these wordy
> emails...
>
> On 30 January 2019 at 15:18, Rolf Turner wrote:
> | On 1/30/19 2:03 PM, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote:
> | > | Now *that* was a revealing suggestion!  I did that and got:
> | > |
> | > | > Desired=Unknown/Install/Remove/Purge/Hold
> | > | > |
> Status=Not/Inst/Conf-files/Unpacked/halF-conf/Half-inst/trig-aWait/Trig-pend
> | > | > |/ Err?=(none)/Reinst-required (Status,Err: uppercase=bad)
> | > | > ||/ Name             Version       Architecture  Description
> | > | >
> +++-================-=============-=============-======================================
> | > | > ii  r-base-core      3.5.2-1bionic amd64         GNU R core of
> statistical computation
> | > |
> | > | So indeed the installation had not actually been done.
> | >
> | > Why do you say that?  That is the __normal__ display after a
> successful installation.
> |
> | I interpreted the "Status=Not/Inst ...." to mean that the package was
> | not installed.  Which is consistent with what was actually the case.
>
> Simply false. Do 'dpkg -l | less' or 'dpkg -l somewildcardhere | less' and
> try to become more familiar with the output. There *is* legend printed
> there.
>
> What matters most: The first two columns are 'ii'.  That is as official to
> "you're good" as you'll ever get.
>
> Again, I would consider familiarising myself with some
> Debian/Ubuntu/Mate/...
> tutorials.  It's not unlike becoming familiar with S/R terminology. It will
> pay back. With dividends.
>

Roff -- you are right that the internet is full of misinformation.  There
are many
clickbait sites preying on people like you having problems with linux. If
you stick with
official Debian documents you will avoid misinformation.   The Debian
Handbook <https://debian-handbook.info/get/now/>
package is available from Ubuntu repositories as well as epub and PDF
versions
and has sections on dpkg and apt.

Online forums where users can comment on the accuracy of posts are useful
when you don't understand the sometimes terse explanations in the Debian
documents, for instance, explanation of dpkg headers
<https://askubuntu.com/questions/18804/what-do-the-various-dpkg-flags-like-ii-rc-mean>
.

It appears that the confused state of your system was due to installing
from source
to /usr, which affects r-base-core and also the "recommended" packages.
The
recovery from this state was confounded by your lack of familiarity with
package
management.

Finally, it is important to recognize that much of the development of linux
and R is done
by volunteers who bring deep expertise and whose time is a precious
resource.  Since
you aren't paying for Ubuntu and R it is only fair that you make an effort
to learn the
basics and eventually be in a position to help others.

You do, however, get points for persistence.  Many people in similar
circumstances
have given up on R and linux as impossibly complicated and unreliable.

-- 
George N. White III

	[[alternative HTML version deleted]]