[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: There must be bug. But where?

Am Donnerstag, den 24.11.2005, 19:53 +0100 schrieb Goswin von Brederlow:
> Daniel Leidert <daniel.leidert.spam@gmx.net> writes:
> > Am Mittwoch, den 23.11.2005, 21:21 +0100 schrieb Goswin von Brederlow:
> >> Let me just make the suggestion to better use reprepro.
> >
> > That's not an alternative. It has no easy incoming mechanisms for remote
> > systems.
> >
> > Regards, Daniel
> And apt-ftparchive has?

No. But debarchiver has. That's the program I'm talking about and which
makes use of apt-ftparchive. The problem is, that I receive the
mentioned error messages when it should rerun apt-ftparchive. And it is
IMO not a bug in debarchiver, because it was working a week ago and
there was no update of the application itself. The bug must be in
another package. I tried to downgrade gzip and also apt-utils/apt. But
both do not solve the problem. I am still examining, why it is
complaining about a non-existent gzip (error 100), because gzip exists.
Maybe it's a temporary problem caused by the latest libstdc++ allocator
change. I don't know. My hope was, that a more skilled (wo)man could
figure that out.

> An incoming queue for reprepo is a ~100 lines shell script to check the
> changes file signature and include the files in reprepro. Probably less
> if you rewrite it in perl.

Yes. But that is something, which needs to be written. debarchiver
exists and works. Or better: it normally works.

Regards, Daniel

Reply to: