Well, there's a long record of fapman messing up things, you can find the reports via google if you'd bother to search, I'm not going to do this work for you. HAM code is open, so your claim fapman is better in that regard is plain wrong. And finally CSSU update gets tested under HAM only, not under apt-get and for sure not under fapman, and you know pretty good that "WFM" is not a valid proof for "it doesn't have the potential to cause trouble". Now you can take these statements as whatever you like, I'm not going into a dogfight about philosophy and I'm also not claiming you insulted me by telling I said "GTFO". I'll simply ignore you on this btw: You: I get confusing results regarding update-able pks, when using fapman. What shall I do? Me : CSSU is meant to get updated via HAM You: That's FUD. Deliver technical reasoning! Me : Sorry, I'm not going to do this. If you think fapman is OK then it's up to you to prove that. You: Duh, did you say "GTFO"? :-( Think about it! /j