Software updater snuck in a package that is unwanted

[Paul Smith]

On Wed, 2017-10-18 at 03:11 +0800, Bret Busby wrote:
> That is pure BS, like the rest of your BS post.

Everything in my post was completely accurate.

> Prithee explain why, if the ubuntu-mate packages have a dependency on
> the trojan package, they work quite well, when that trojan package is
> NOT installed

Just because the people who created the ubuntu-mate package declared,
in their package definition, that it depends on unattended-upgrades
does NOT mean that the desktop won't work at all without it.

There are various reasons why they might have declared that package
dependency.  The most likely one is that ubuntu-mate is a meta-
package[1] which represents a completely-installed Ubuntu MATE desktop:
it declares dependencies on all packages considered part of the
desktop.

This allows people to ensure that they have all the packages expected
for a "full MATE system" by just running one command, like:

  $ sudo apt install ubuntu-mate

If you try to remove any package that is considered to be part of a
full Ubuntu MATE system, then the meta-package is also removed.

There could be other reasons, of course, including someone made a
mistake: none of us are Ubuntu MATE developers so we can't say for sure
.  I provided a link to methods you could use to ask them.  I recommend
you don't go storming in there calling their software trojans and
instead ask politely for clarification.

But that's up to you.

> You are obviously, just trolling, rather than making any attempt to
> help with the problem.   

So in addition to insulting the people who created unattended-upgrades
by incorrectly calling their software a "trojan", you are being foolish
by trying to tell people with vastly more experience than yourself that
they don't know what they're talking about.

Great way to get help with your problems.

[1] https://debian-handbook.info/browse/stable/sect.building-first-pack
age.html