On Thu, Jun 05, 2003 at 02:10:12PM +0100, Colin Watson wrote: > On Thu, Jun 05, 2003 at 01:43:41PM +0100, Richard Kimber wrote: > > When I do and apt-get upgrade, list-bugs produces a short list of bugs > > and asks me if I want to proceed. However, I'm not sure how to > > interpret the information it provides. For example, take ssh. Of one > > bug it says <done>, of the other it says <open>, yet the summary at > > the end says that ssh has two bugs. Is this a bug in list-bugs, or > > does <done> not mean that the bug has been fixed? The man page > > doesn't say what <done> means. > > I suspect that apt-listbugs just lists all the non-archived bugs: bugs > are archived after 28 days of being closed with no activity. Offhand > this would strike me as suboptimal behaviour by apt-listbugs. (I haven't > really looked at it yet, though.) Haven't had a look at it either, but when the BTS tells apt-listbugs a bug is <done>, the package hasn't necessarily made its way to the mirrors yet. So the listing of done bugs is necessary, unless apt-listbugs tracks which version has the bug and which one is to be installed. Which IMO should be the responsibility of the admin, and not be delegated to automated tools. Cheers, Nick -- x----------------------------------------------------------------------x | I maintain a Zero-Tolerance policy for | | Zero-Tolerance policy maintainers. | |----------------------------------------------------------------------| | Nicolas Kratz <nick@ikarus.dyndns.org> <n_kratz@cs.uni-frankfurt.de> | x----------------------------------------------------------------------x
Attachment:
pgpZOOthRqlOO.pgp
Description: PGP signature