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

Re: Bug#703092: dpkg --set-selections ignores available packages never installed or removed by dpkg



Control: clone -1 release-notes
Control: severity -1 wishlist

Hi!

The bug against dpkg, is about a behavior change that many sysadmins
might be surprised to find, so to avoid that it might make sense to
document in as many places as possible.

Hmm, but I guess it might be too late for this now, and going through
the release notes, I'm not sure if this really fits in there. I was not
sure where to plug such information there anyway...

On Sun, 2013-04-21 at 19:30:48 +0200, Guillem Jover wrote:
> Regarding this bug report. Yes, the missing documentation is a bug,
> and was an oversight at the time, my bad. This behavior change was not
> done out of a whim, as seems to be implied in several of the mails on
> this bug report, there was a reason as I explained at the time, dpkg
> would otherwise be unable to refer to packages on its own database;
> the fact that I consider the new behavior the correct one is just an
> extra, and in addition a useful warning is printed on unknown packages
> which could be missed previously (even with an up-to-date available
> database).

... I'm attaching a small tentative patch, on the best place I could
find, just in case.

Thanks,
Guillem
Index: en/upgrading.dbk
===================================================================
--- en/upgrading.dbk	(revision 10039)
+++ en/upgrading.dbk	(working copy)
@@ -368,7 +368,10 @@
 </screen>
 <para>
 Replace <literal>hold</literal> with <literal>install</literal> to unset the
-<quote>hold</quote> state.
+<quote>hold</quote> state. Also take into account that starting with dpkg
+1.16.x, an up-to-date available database is needed for the command to be
+useful (see the <ulink url="&url-wiki;Teams/Dpkg/FAQ">dpkg FAQ</ulink>
+for more information).
 </para>
 <para>
 If there is anything you need to fix, it is best to make sure your

Reply to: