Bug#4474: marked as done (dpkg versus cron and at)
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.)
(administrator, Debian Bugs database)
Received: (at bugs) by bugs.debian.org; 11 Sep 1996 09:42:49 +0000
Received: (qmail-queue invoked from smtpd); 11 Sep 1996 09:30:36 -0000
Received: from sputnik.umel.fee.vutbr.cz (126.96.36.199)
by master.debian.org with SMTP; 11 Sep 1996 09:30:34 -0000
Received: from pcKomanec.umel.fee.vutbr.cz by sputnik.umel.fee.vutbr.cz with SMTP
(188.8.131.52/16.2) id AA26213; Wed, 11 Sep 1996 11:23:40 +0200
Date: Wed, 11 Sep 1996 11:23:40 +0100
From: Robert Komanec <email@example.com>
Organization: UMEL FEI VUT
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02 (X11; I; Linux 1.2.13 i586)
Subject: dpkg versus cron and at
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-2
I run into a problem with dpkg (or what):
I used to have 'cron' and 'at' on my system, but I suddenly realized,
that they are gone. I admit, I could have deleted them in 'dselect'
by mistake. However, it should be possible to install them again.
This is the status in dselect
: ------- Available Important packages in section admin -------
: -** Imp admin at 2.9b-1 2.9b-1 Delayed job execution
: -** Imp admin cron 3.0pl1-32 3.0pl1-32 management of regular
This is the status on console (similar results for 'man at' or 'find at'...)
:#type at cron
:type: at: not found
:type: cron: not found
To recover, I tried to delete (remove) at and cron in dselect, now it looks like
: --- Imp admin at 2.9b-1 2.9b-1 Delayed job execution
: --- Imp admin cron 3.0pl1-32 3.0pl1-32 management of regular
So now there should NOT be these packages. After I select them again
and try to install, I get from dselect
:Processing status file...
:Processing Package files...
:Constructing list of files to get...
:Approximate total space required: 0k
:Do you want to select the files to get [n]:
and NO files are downloaded, installed etc etc.
The status changes to the original state then.
(I got no responses from linux.debian.users)
Robert Komanec mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org using MIME
UMEL FEI VUT check out if http://www.umel.fee.vutbr.cz is alive
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) (184.108.40.206)
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 <email@example.com>
To: firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com,
Subject: some dpkg bug maintainence with permission from wichert
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
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
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