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

Bug#47319: marked as done (Apt loops endlessly when package database screwed.)



Your message dated Wed, 13 Oct 1999 18:18:12 -0600 (MDT)
with message-id <[🔎] Pine.LNX.3.96.991013181233.19491N-100000@localhost>
and subject line Bug#47319: Apt loops endlessly when package database screwed.
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; 13 Oct 1999 11:49:02 +0000
Received: (qmail 29790 invoked from network); 13 Oct 1999 11:49:02 -0000
Received: from taurus.cus.cam.ac.uk (cusexim@131.111.8.48)
  by master.debian.org with SMTP; 13 Oct 1999 11:49:02 -0000
Received: from djsd100 by taurus.cus.cam.ac.uk with local (Exim 3.034 #1)
	id 11bMtv-0001Oe-00
	for submit@bugs.debian.org; Wed, 13 Oct 1999 12:48:59 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: David Damerell <djsd100@cam.ac.uk>
To: submit@bugs.debian.org
Subject: Apt loops endlessly when package database screwed.
X-Mailer: VM 6.28 under Emacs 19.34.1
Reply-To: djsd100@cam.ac.uk
Message-Id: <[🔎] E11bMtv-0001Oe-00@taurus.cus.cam.ac.uk>
Sender: David Damerell <djsd100@cus.cam.ac.uk>
Date: Wed, 13 Oct 1999 12:48:59 +0100

Package: apt
Version: 0.3.12

I managed to get things into a rather strange state; I think it was
because I was using packages in 'unstable' from two different sources
of two different ages, and there was some kind of circular version
dependency.

Dpkg (1.4.1.8), when asked to do anything, exited with 'assertion
failed' (um, there was more to this error message, but I have to
confess that I didn't save it at the time and it only occurred to me
to report the bug later; it was something that suggested it had
recursed somewhere too many times).

Apt, on the other hand, sat consuming CPU after
Building Dependency Tree...
indefinitely. I would suggest it needs to perform the same sanity
checks as dpkg.

-- 
David Damerell, Computer Officer, Department of Chemistry, Cambridge
Work: djsd100@cam.ac.uk    Personal: damerell@chiark.greenend.org.uk
---------------------------------------
Received: (at 47319-done) by bugs.debian.org; 14 Oct 1999 00:18:21 +0000
Received: (qmail 32275 invoked from network); 14 Oct 1999 00:18:20 -0000
Received: from pilsener.srv.ualberta.ca (129.128.5.19)
  by master.debian.org with SMTP; 14 Oct 1999 00:18:20 -0000
Received: from localhost (async10-15.remote.ualberta.ca [129.128.238.168])
	by pilsener.srv.ualberta.ca (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id SAA18819;
	Wed, 13 Oct 1999 18:18:14 -0600 (MDT)
Received: from localhost [127.0.0.1] (jgg)
	by localhost with smtp (Exim 2.11 #1)
	id 11bYay-0007eu-00 (Debian); Wed, 13 Oct 1999 18:18:12 -0600
Date: Wed, 13 Oct 1999 18:18:12 -0600 (MDT)
From: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@ualberta.ca>
X-Sender: jgg@localhost
To: djsd100@cam.ac.uk, 47319-done@bugs.debian.org
cc: APT Development Team <deity@lists.debian.org>
Subject: Re: Bug#47319: Apt loops endlessly when package database screwed.
In-Reply-To: <[🔎] E11bMtv-0001Oe-00@taurus.cus.cam.ac.uk>
Message-ID: <[🔎] Pine.LNX.3.96.991013181233.19491N-100000@localhost>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII


On Wed, 13 Oct 1999, David Damerell wrote:

> Package: apt
> Version: 0.3.12
 
> I managed to get things into a rather strange state; I think it was
> because I was using packages in 'unstable' from two different sources
> of two different ages, and there was some kind of circular version
> dependency.

There was a looping bug in some 0.3.12's that sounds mighty like this.
Your problem report isn't terribly usefull otherwise..

Jason


Reply to: