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

Bug#718317: apt-cudf: doesn't include any source preference in the Request stanza



Heya, and thanks for your bug report!

On Tue, Jul 30, 2013 at 06:16:34AM +0200, Kernc wrote:
> When apt-get is run with custom --solver, e.g. like this:
> 
> $ apt-get --solver custom_solver install xfce4-panel/testing   ,

Question about this: what is "custom_solver"? Is it something you've
added yourself? You can list the available solvers on your machine like
this:

  zack@timira:~$ update-cudf-solvers -l
  cudf: aspcud
  edsp: dump
  edsp: apt
  edsp: aspcud

Unless you've added yourself a solver called "custom_solver" (see
README.cudf-solvers for info on how to do that), your command above
won't do anything meaningful.

> the resulting CUDF scenario starts with the following request stanza:
> 
> Request: EDSP 0.4
> Install: xfce4-panel:i386
> Strict-Pinning: no
> 
> This is the whole of it, and there is no mention of the fact,
> that the user explicitly requested installation from Suite=testing.

As minor nitpicking: note that the above is not a *CUDF* scenario, it's
an EDSP one, which is an intermediate, Debian-specific format. (See the
EDSP protocol documentation shipped with APT for more info about it.)

That said, it is definitely not normal that the EDSP document contains
only the request, but:

1) I cannot reproduce the problem.

   If you want to try in a solver-neutral version, you can for instance
   try with this:

     apt-get -s --solver dump install xfce4-panel/testing

   and send us the resulting /tmp/dump.edsp file

2) it is indeed normal that in the request stanza there is no mention of
   the fact you've asked to install from testing. That information is
   "compiled" (by APT) to a numerical pin value + a boolean stating
   which package is the installation "candidate".  In my example above,
   I correctly get an apt-pin value of 500 for the version of
   xfce4-panel in testing, and an apt-candidate set to true for the same
   package.

> Also, why doesn't apt's EDSP specify a Preamble stanza with Suite
> defined as suggested here: http://mancoosi.org/cudf/primer/ ?

Because EDSP != CUDF

Cheers.
-- 
Stefano Zacchiroli  . . . . . . .  zack@upsilon.cc . . . . o . . . o . o
Maître de conférences . . . . . http://upsilon.cc/zack . . . o . . . o o
Former Debian Project Leader  . . @zack on identi.ca . . o o o . . . o .
« the first rule of tautology club is the first rule of tautology club »

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature


Reply to: