Bug#1086801: apt: autoremove fails to remove garbage packages with unrelated Suggests links

--rs3k4nvjkb5haqnc
Content-Type: text/plain; protected-headers=v1; charset=utf-8;
	format=flowed
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Subject: Re: Bug#1086801: apt: autoremove fails to remove garbage packages
 with unrelated Suggests links
MIME-Version: 1.0

On Wed, Nov 06, 2024 at 10:07:54AM +0100, David Kalnischkies wrote:
>Am Wed, Nov 06, 2024 at 01:59:59AM -0600, schrieb Aaron Rainbolt:
>> 4. Install the package with `sudo apt install ./test-meta_1.0_all.deb`.
>> 5. Purge the package with `sudo apt purge test-meta`.
>> 6. Run `sudo apt autopurge`.
>>
>> Expected result: `gitk` should be removed during the autopurge step.
>>
>> Actual result: Only the test-meta package is removed.
>
>That might be expected if there are mere seconds between step 4 and 5 as
>the user has realistically only interacted with test-meta in that time
>frame. The longer the time is between these two steps through it becomes
>possible that the user discovered gitk and fell in love with it.
>
>autoremoving it would be very wrong then (and gitk is a really bad
>example here as you interact with it directly; many recommends "just"
>enable features within the package that recommended them).

I agree that autoremoving gitk in step 6 would be wrong.

However, what about `sudo apt purge --autoremove test-meta`? As I
understand it, that currently has the same effect as `sudo apt purge
gitk` followed by a separate `autoremove`; but would it be possible
for the `--autoremove` flag to instead mean =E2=80=9Cauto-remove packages t=
hat
are made autoremovable as a result of removing test-meta=E2=80=9D? In effec=
t,
something like =E2=80=9Cdetermine the list of currently auto-removable
packages=E2=80=9D, =E2=80=9Cremove test-meta=E2=80=9D, =E2=80=9Cremove any =
packages that are now
auto-removable but weren=E2=80=99t before the test-meta removal=E2=80=9D.

With that change, setting SuggestsImportant to false temporarily would
allow the example installation to be reversed.

Regards,

Stephen


--rs3k4nvjkb5haqnc
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
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=ERkp
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--rs3k4nvjkb5haqnc--