On Wed, Feb 22, 2017 at 01:06:24PM +1300, martin f krafft wrote: > root@cymbaline:/etc/apt/sources.list.d# apt-get upgrade […] > The following packages will be REMOVED: > ifupdown libasprintf0c2 libperl4-corelibs-perl libuuid-perl python-bson python-pymongo > > and indeed, it then went on to remove ifupdown. Outrageous! apt was always slow to adapt, so the new way of saying one thing and doing the other isn't fully implemented yet. I am sorry. SCNR > What am I not understanding right here? Shouldn't "apt-get upgrade" > NEVER EVER EVER EVER remove something? I am not opposed to the possibility of bugs in apt in general, but the amount of "upgrade with removal"-bugs which all turned out to be either scrollback-confusion, aliases or wrapper scripts is astonishing, so triple-double-check this first. Fun fact: We have a few reports which request "upgrade" to remove packages. You know, automatically installed packages, obsolete ones or obviously clear upgrades like exim4 to postfix (or the other way around, depending on who reports it). I tend to be against that, but in case of need we could still consider that a feature and close bugs… win-win :P > Can I find out in hindsight (can't reproduce this) what might have > happened? /var/log/apt/history.log* should be able to tell you which commands you have run and which solutions were applied due to it. That also includes dates, so you might be able to fish a /var/lib/dpkg/status file from before the "bad" interaction in /var/backups/dpkg.status.*. Pick the apt.extended_states* file from around the same date for good measure. A good idea might also be to write down the result of "grep ^Date /var/lib/apt/lists/*Release" somewhere to have an easier time of getting the same mirror state out of snapshot if we need that. Armed with that you can try debugging on your own as detailed in apts README (in the source) and/or I would suggest to report a bug with all the details you collected [and all those the bugscript wants to collect] as its hard to reproduce otherwise and in general: native tools are offtopic (by thread popularity) on d-d@ … … but let me help you to get the thread some replies: I don't have ifupdown installed anymore. systemd-networkd + wpa_supplicant FTW. (also: RC bugs for all node packages failing a cat-picture test!) Oh, and of course the standard reply: You know, apt does print a proposal not an EULA – so you don't have to press 'yes' without reading. Best regards David Kalnischkies
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature