Why Is Lubuntu-Desktop Dependent on Apps like Abiword & Gnumeric?

[buzzingrobot]

I've never done much with Lubuntu or LXDE, but I gave 14.04.04 Lubuntu a look today in a VM. I noticed that trying to remove Abiword or Gnumeric or any one of several other packages that are part of the default install would also remove lubuntu-desktop and trigger an autoremove suggestion that would have removed a few dozen core packages and rather definitively broken things.

I checked and both lubuntu-desktop and the lxde meta-packages have dependencies that include standalone apps like Abiword, Leafpad, etc.

I'm not looking for a workaround here, but I am curious how and why those dependencies were established like that.

[vasa1]

That's because 'lubuntu-desktop' isn't a conventional package but a metapackage.

As you've seen, lubuntu-desktop will be removed if you remove abiword, gnumeric, or several other packages. But the functionality of the desktop, per se, is unaffected.

Here are some links I've bookmarked on the topic:
http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.p...576&p=12389408
http://www.mail-archive.com/lubuntu-.../msg03490.html
http://askubuntu.com/questions/23366...ubuntu-desktop
http://forums.debian.net/viewtopic.php?t=104157
https://help.ubuntu.com/community/MetaPackages

For me, the only relevance a metapackage has after the initial upgrade is done, is that it needs to be installed back just before I do an upgrade from 14.04 to 14.10 (or 16.04).

Incidentally, most other desktop environments of the official Ubuntu flavors have a similar reliance on a desktop metapackage. What you've seen isn't restricted to Lubuntu/LXDE.

[buzzingrobot]

That's because 'lubuntu-desktop' isn't a conventional package but a metapackage.

Yes, but the accompanying autoremove suggestion would have removed a few dozen "real" essential packages and left the system unusable. I didn't do that, of course. But, we often see here that inexperienced users are victimized by autoremove suggestions.

The other autoremove suggestion I saw immediately after the install is suspect, I think. Why would the package manager on a new and pristine system have a reason to generate it?

[kansasnoob]

Lubuntu also builds a "core" package that can be installed on top of Ubuntu:

lance@lance-desktop:~$ sudo apt-get install lubuntu-core -s
[sudo] password for lance: 
Reading package lists... Done
Building dependency tree       
Reading state information... Done
The following extra packages will be installed:
  consolekit desktop-base gnome-icon-theme-full gnome-themes-standard
  gnome-themes-standard-data gtk2-engines libck-connector0 libfm-data
  libfm-extra4 libfm-gtk-data libfm-gtk4 libfm-modules libfm4 libgif4
  libid3tag0 libimlib2 libmenu-cache-bin libmenu-cache3 libobrender29 libobt2
  libpam-ck-connector lightdm-gtk-greeter lubuntu-artwork
  lubuntu-artwork-14-04 lubuntu-default-settings lubuntu-icon-theme
  lubuntu-lxpanel-icons lxmenu-data lxpanel lxsession lxsession-data
  lxsession-logout obconf openbox pcmanfm plymouth-theme-lubuntu-logo
  plymouth-theme-lubuntu-text
Suggested packages:
  gnome kde-standard xfce4 wmaker libfm-tools nautilus-actions amixer scrot
  galculator xscreensaver gpicview lxde-common menu fonts-dejavu libxml2-dev
  tint2 openbox-menu openbox-gnome-session openbox-kde-session
The following NEW packages will be installed:
  consolekit desktop-base gnome-icon-theme-full gnome-themes-standard
  gnome-themes-standard-data gtk2-engines libck-connector0 libfm-data
  libfm-extra4 libfm-gtk-data libfm-gtk4 libfm-modules libfm4 libgif4
  libid3tag0 libimlib2 libmenu-cache-bin libmenu-cache3 libobrender29 libobt2
  libpam-ck-connector lightdm-gtk-greeter lubuntu-artwork
  lubuntu-artwork-14-04 lubuntu-core lubuntu-default-settings
  lubuntu-icon-theme lubuntu-lxpanel-icons lxmenu-data lxpanel lxsession
  lxsession-data lxsession-logout obconf openbox pcmanfm
  plymouth-theme-lubuntu-logo plymouth-theme-lubuntu-text
0 upgraded, 38 newly installed, 0 to remove and 0 not upgraded.

So maybe if 'lubuntu-desktop' is removed in the process of removing unwanted packages just directly installing 'lubuntu-core' would correct the autoremove behavior?

[vasa1]

Yes, but the accompanying autoremove suggestion would have removed a few dozen "real" essential packages and left the system unusable. I didn't do that, of course. But, we often see here that inexperienced users are victimized by autoremove suggestions.

The other autoremove suggestion I saw immediately after the install is suspect, I think. Why would the package manager on a new and pristine system have a reason to generate it?

Maybe things have changed. I've been removing software that would also entail removing lubuntu-desktop and haven't seen a few dozen "real" essential packages being suggested for removal. Why, even on my present install, I don't have lubuntu-desktop anymore:

05:31 PM ~ $ apt-cache policy lubuntu-desktop
lubuntu-desktop:
  Installed: (none)
  Candidate: 0.55
  Version table:
     0.55 0
        500 http://archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/ trusty/universe amd64 Packages
05:31 PM ~ $

And this is an extract from the relevant history.log:

Start-Date: 2014-11-14  18:24:18
Commandline: apt-get purge firefox
Purge: firefox:amd64 (33.0+build2-0ubuntu0.14.04.1), lubuntu-desktop:amd64 (0.55)
End-Date: 2014-11-14  18:24:22

[buzzingrobot]

Still seems anomalous to me. Admittedly, I overlooked the fact that lubuntu-desktop is a meta-package. But, the non-meta packages the accompanying autoremove wanted to delete included among others, the xserver-xorg-XXXXX packages. And, I don't think that separate immediate post-install autoremove suggestion should have been there, at all. Makes me wonder if there's a flaw in the package list installed in the new 14.04.4 images. Otherwise, why would the first use of the package manager on a new install produce it?

(I'm not fond of autoremove, in any case. It's potentially dangerous and relies on user savvy to avoid that potentiality. If packages need to be removed, and can be safely, then they should be removed as part of the action that triggers these autoremove suggestions. If not, don't remove them and don't suggest they be removed.)

[vasa1]

I guess I'm fortunate that I've never encountered problems with autoremove.

[buzzingrobot]

Did a new VM install from a new ISO image, rebooted, opened a terminal, did "sudo apt update && sudo apt upgrade", and saw the same autoremove suggestion. C'est la vie.

[ian-weisser]

Which .iso image?
Lubuntu? Ubuntu? Server? Mini? Something else?

There are a few autoremote-tries-to-uninstall-X threads, most were users who built up from the mini .iso.

The desktop images apt-marks all packages as 'manual' (human selected, inelegible for autoremove), but building up from the server or mini images doesn't do that.
The 'manual' marking is a workaround. It's working around the very problem you seem to be describing - users can erroneously autoremove most of their system by deleting one GUI application.
The rather minor down side of the workaround is that all those originally-installed packages, and their dependencies, can never be autoremoves. If you want to

[vasa1]

Which .iso image?
Lubuntu? Ubuntu? Server? Mini? Something else?
...

That would be interesting to know.
Also, the output of apt-get purge -s abiword for example.