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

Bug#4449: marked as done (dselect feedback missing)



Your message dated Sun, 10 Oct 1999 02:14:10 -0400
with message-id <19991010021410.E18835@lappy.djj.state.va.us>
and subject line some dpkg bug maintainence with permission from wichert
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.

This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.

(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what I am
talking about this indicates a serious mail system misconfiguration
somewhere.  Please contact me immediately.)

Darren Benham
(administrator, Debian Bugs database)

--------------------------------------
Received: (at submit) by bugs.debian.org; 9 Sep 1996 03:31:02 +0000
Received: (qmail-queue invoked from smtpd); 9 Sep 1996 03:27:48 -0000
Received: from valaga.salk.edu (bap@198.202.66.110)
  by master.debian.org with SMTP; 9 Sep 1996 03:27:48 -0000
Received: (from bap@localhost) by valaga.salk.edu (8.6.12/8.6.9) id UAA23538; Sun, 8 Sep 1996 20:21:14 -0700
Date: Sun, 8 Sep 1996 20:21:14 -0700
Message-Id: <199609090321.UAA23538@valaga.salk.edu>
From: Barak Pearlmutter <bap@sloan.salk.edu>
To: submit@bugs.debian.org
Subject: dselect feedback missing
Reply-to: Barak.Pearlmutter@alumni.cs.cmu.edu

Package: dpkg
Version: 1.2.14elf

When you go through lots of dselect work editing the package selection
menu, then you're done (whew!) and you hit the big INSTALL button ...

before dselect goes ahead and installs stuff, it should give you a
very short description of what it's about to do, and give you a chance
to back out if you want.  Eg:

    The following will be installed:
     foo-1.1-1a, bar-2.2-2b, taper-6.2-1
    and the following will be upgraded to new versions:
     lyx-0.9.23-1

    lyx-0.9.23-1 recommends dvips, which is not installed, but is available.
    taper-6.2-1 recommends ftape, which is not available.

    Proceed?

This is particularly important because the whole selection process is
succeptable to error, given the wealth of packages, one-keystroke
commands, modes, conflict resolutions, automatic posting of install
requests due to dependencies and recommendations, etc.
---------------------------------------
Received: (at 1037-done) by bugs.debian.org; 10 Oct 1999 06:12:48 +0000
Received: (qmail 18194 invoked from network); 10 Oct 1999 06:12:46 -0000
Received: from ppp28.ts1-3.newportnews.visi.net (HELO lappy.djj.state.va.us) (209.8.197.92)
  by master.debian.org with SMTP; 10 Oct 1999 06:12:46 -0000
Received: from bmc by lappy.djj.state.va.us with local (Exim 3.03 #1 (Debian))
	id 11aCFG-00038m-00; Sun, 10 Oct 1999 02:14:10 -0400
Date: Sun, 10 Oct 1999 02:14:10 -0400
From: Ben Collins <bcollins@debian.org>
To: 1685-done@bugs.debian.org, 16217-done@bugs.debian.org,
	10263-done@bugs.debian.org, 4074-done@bugs.debian.org,
	1037-done@bugs.debian.org
Subject: some dpkg bug maintainence with permission from wichert
Message-ID: <19991010021410.E18835@lappy.djj.state.va.us>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
User-Agent: Mutt/1.0pre2i

1685: dpkg-split command line parsing.
  My take on this, the options expected aren't in a compatible format,
  so it can't be made GNU style. Also the man page shows that the
  complained about format is expected. IMO, if it's documented as such,
  then it should be acceptible. GNU is not the endall argument format.

16217: prompting for clearing avail on updates in dselect
  dselect doesn't seem to do this anymore

10263: segfaults on upgrade
  Very old bug concerning libc5->libc6 upgrades. I don't think we have any
  way to really reproduce it, plus the reports show that the cause was
  possibly found from some dependencies, but the original poster never
  responded back.

4074: conffile's left behind
  Not a current problem with dpkg it seems

1037: dselect help screen
  Ian said he would fix this in the report when he released the C version of
  dpkg, that seems to have occured (bug report is vague on what the actual bug
  is, and attempts at clarifying have failed).


Ben....more to come


Reply to: