On Wed, Jul 02, 2008 at 02:01:44PM +0800, Magicloud wrote: > I don't think so. Obviously, if the network is broken, it absolutely does > not mean that there is NO packages, just aptitude can not know. This gives > it no right to erease all information stored locally. > It is like, if my mobile was broken today, my wife could not contact with > me, so she should think that I DIE? And call the cops, and throw out all my > staff? It is not right, Mr. > > -----邮件原件----- > 发件人: Paul Johnson [mailto:baloo@ursine.ca] > 发送时间: 2008年7月2日 12:46 > 收件人: debian-user@lists.debian.org > 主题: Re: Stunned by aptitude. > > On Wed, 2008-07-02 at 09:40 +0800, Magicloud wrote: > > Hello, > > > > When I used aptitude, I noticed that aptitude does not have > > an error handling mechanism. When I `aptitude update`, if the network > > is broken (like dns problem, route problem), it can not connect to the > > server, so it reports error, and clean up local apt record. If I > > stupidly `aptitude autoclean` then, all my debs are gone. > > It is doing error handling: If it can't reach that server, there's no point > in considering it a valid source. If you have no valid sources, there's no > current packages. It's working as designed. Not really. See #201842 and #479620. Unfortunately Daniel Burrows still didn't comment on them. Maybe he will show up here? Regards, Andrei -- If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough. (Albert Einstein)
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature