Re: deity-digest Digest V101 #43
I've recived thousands of that e-mails in the last two days. Could you
stop this flood please?
Thanks,
joke
On Mon, Aug 13, 2001 at 05:51:48PM -0000, deity-digest-request@lists.debian.org wrote:
>
> deity-digest Digest Volume 101 : Issue 43
>
> Today's Topics:
> Processed: [ owner@bugs.debian.org (Debian Bug T ]
> Re: Bug#42779: apt: apt-cdrom doesn' [ Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@ualberta.ca> ]
> Bug#41784: apt-get busy loops fixing [ Giuliano Procida <myxie@debian.org> ]
> Re: gnome-apt [ Havoc Pennington <rhp@zirx.pair.com ]
> Re: Bug#41784: apt-get busy loops fi [ Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@ualberta.ca> ]
> WARNING: APT removes bash on slink u [ Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@ualberta.ca> ]
> Re: Bug#42779: apt: apt-cdrom doesn' [ Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@ualberta.ca> ]
> Bug#42719: marked as done (No approp [ owner@bugs.debian.org (Debian Bug T ]
> Re: WARNING: APT removes bash on sli [ Thomas Quinot <thomas@debian.org> ]
> Bug#42891: apt-get should understand [ Decklin Foster <decklin@home.com> ]
> Re: WARNING: APT removes bash on sli [ Julian Gilbey <J.D.Gilbey@qmw.ac.uk ]
> APT vs DSELECT ? [ Guy Hulbert <guy@bioinfo.sickkids.o ]
> bogus dependency [ Bernd Kreimeier <bk@gamers.org> ]
> Re: bogus dependency [ Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@ualberta.ca> ]
> Re: bogus dependency [ Dale Scheetz <dwarf@polaris.net> ]
> Re: gnome-apt [ Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@ualberta.ca> ]
> Bug#42723: wish for apt [ "Darren/Torin/Who Ever..." <torin@d ]
> Bug#43130: apt: weird progressmeter [ Wichert Akkerman <wichert@cs.leiden ]
> apt-move script? [ Sander Smeenk <fluor@infinity.iaf.n ]
> Building CVS apt [ Matt Porter <mmporter@home.com> ]
> Bug#41839: apt: apt-get reinstalls p [ Thomas Schoepf <schoepf@informatik. ]
> Bug#41839: apt: apt-get reinstalls p [ Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@ualberta.ca> ]
> Bug#41839: apt: apt-get reinstalls p [ Thomas Schoepf <schoepf@informatik. ]
> Bug#43251: apt: desc.apt has typo [ Tatsuya Maruyama <paz@mapletown.net ]
> Bug#43275: apt: apt does not offer t [ pimlott@idiomtech.com ]
> Data socket timeouts [ Levi <levi@top.monad.net> ]
> Bug#43286: apt installing virtual pk [ Amy Fong <afong@furryterror.org> ]
> Re: Data socket timeouts [ Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@ualberta.ca> ]
> Re: Bug#42779: apt: apt-cdrom doesn' [ Georg Bauer <gb@hugo.westfalen.de> ]
> Bug#43356: apt: security [ Lazarus Long <lazarus@overdue.dhis. ]
> Bug#43368: gnome-apt: gnome-apt does [ Enterprise Mail Account <olly@lfix. ]
> apt-get and rproxy [ Matthew Hawkins <matt@mail.goldweb. ]
> Syntax error in description file [ Michele Dalla Silvestra <dalla@keyc ]
> Re: apt-get and rproxy [ Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@ualberta.ca> ]
> Re: Bug#43368: gnome-apt: gnome-apt [ Havoc Pennington <rhp@zirx.pair.com ]
> Bug#43476: apt-get doesn't honour no [ David Luyer <luyer@ucs.uwa.edu.au> ]
> Re: Bug#43368: gnome-apt: gnome-apt [ "Oliver Elphick" <olly@lfix.co.uk> ]
> Help request : apt & firewall [ Vandoorselaere Yoann <yoann@coldser ]
> Re: Bug#43368: gnome-apt: gnome-apt [ Havoc Pennington <rhp@zirx.pair.com ]
> From: owner@bugs.debian.org (Debian Bug Tracking System)
> To: Remco van de Meent <remco@debian.org>
> Cc: APT Development Team <deity@lists.debian.org>(apt #42780)
> Subject: Processed:
>
> Processing commands for control@bugs.debian.org:
>
> > severity #42780 fixed
> Bug#42780: apt: apt-get has problems with file:/ types
> Severity set to `fixed'.
>
> > thanks
> Stopping processing here.
>
> Please contact me if you need assistance.
>
> Ian Jackson
> (administrator, Debian bugs database)
> From: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@ualberta.ca>
> To: Georg Bauer <gb@hugo.westfalen.de>
> cc: 42779@bugs.debian.org, APT Development Team <deity@lists.debian.org>
> Subject: Re: Bug#42779: apt: apt-cdrom doesn't scan CD right
>
> On Tue, 10 Aug 1999, Georg Bauer wrote:
>
> > On Tue, 10 Aug 1999 08:50:14 -0600 (MDT) jgg@ualberta.ca (Jason Gunthorpe)
> > wrote:
> >
> > >Try this with the other version and if it works then it is just more
> > >defectiveness from that version, otherwise you'll have to look at that CD
> > >a little more closely for me, send over a ls -lR /cdrom1/
> >
> > Still the same (the mountpoint has changed, but that should be irrelevant):
> >
> > gb@goggle:~$ sudo apt-cdrom -m -d /home/ftp/cdrom1 add
> > Using CD-ROM mount point /home/ftp/cdrom1/
> > Identifying.. [6b6f3b8d3d26e1f4c32eb23d1ba3f9d2-2]
> > Scanning Disc for index files.. Found 0 package index files.
> > E: Unable to locate any package files, perhaps this is not a Debian Disc
> >
> > ls -lR is attached as gzipped textfile.
>
> Bah, better send a strace too :<
>
> Jason
> From: Giuliano Procida <myxie@debian.org>
> To: 41784@bugs.debian.org
> Subject: Bug#41784: apt-get busy loops fixing dependencies
>
> This has just happened to me as well (same version of apt-get). Let me
> know whether you want the status files etc.
>
> hilfy# apt-get -qudy dselect-upgrade
> Reading Package Lists...
> Building Dependency Tree...
> You might want to run `apt-get -f install' to correct these.
> Sorry, but the following packages have unmet dependencies:
> gconv-modules: Depends: libc6 (= 2.1.2-0pre2) but 2.1.2-0pre7 is installed
> console-tools: Depends: console-tools-libs (= 1:0.2.1-1) but 1:0.2.1-2 is installed
> E: Unmet dependencies. Try using -f.
> hilfy# apt-get -fqudy dselect-upgrade
> Reading Package Lists...
> Building Dependency Tree...
> Correcting dependencies...
>
> Giuliano.
> From: Havoc Pennington <rhp@zirx.pair.com>
> To: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@ualberta.ca>
> cc: Guilherme Soares Zahn <gzahn@cnen.gov.br>,
> Bernhard Rieder <e9325898@student.tuwien.ac.at>,
> Debian User List <debian-user@lists.debian.org>, deity@lists.debian.org
> Subject: Re: gnome-apt
>
> On Mon, 9 Aug 1999, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, 9 Aug 1999, Havoc Pennington wrote:
> >
> > > the kind of thing that would cause a compile failure. It was just a change
> > > in library semantics. So gnome-apt wasn't checking for all the proper
> > > circumstances.
> >
> > Was there? Hmm..
> >
>
> Yeah the pkgAcquire::Run can return cancelled. I think I made that change
> actually, but I could have sworn I updated gnome-apt to reflect it; I
> don't know how I didn't. Blah.
>
> I wish egcs would warn about using an enum as a bool...
>
> Havoc
> From: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@ualberta.ca>
> To: Giuliano Procida <myxie@debian.org>, 41784@bugs.debian.org
> cc: debian-bugs-dist@lists.debian.org,
> APT Development Team <deity@lists.debian.org>
> Subject: Re: Bug#41784: apt-get busy loops fixing dependencies
>
> On Wed, 11 Aug 1999, Giuliano Procida wrote:
>
> > This has just happened to me as well (same version of apt-get). Let me
> > know whether you want the status files etc.
>
> This has been fixed in the cvs version.. If you use dpkg to configure the
> packages that are half-installed it will go away - or you can test
> apt 0.3.11.1 at http://www.debian.org/~jgg/
>
> Jason
> From: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@ualberta.ca>
> To: Debian Developers <debian-devel@lists.debian.org>,
> Debian Users List <debian-user@lists.debian.org>,
> Deity Creation Team <deity@lists.debian.org>
> Subject: WARNING: APT removes bash on slink upgrade
>
> Package: bash
> Version: 2.02.1-1.5
>
> Hi all,
>
> The current bash/libreadline dependencies in potato are formed in an
> conflicts/pre-depends loop that causes APT to remove bash, install
> libreadlineg2 and then try to reinstall bash (which fails because bash
> needs bash to install [remove actually]..) Newer APTs were supposed to
> warn about this situation, but even that seems broken - so be carefull!
>
> This is due to a recent bash NMU which now pre-depends on the potato
> libreadlineg2 which conflicts with the slink bash.
>
> Bash -MUST- be re-uploaded with the proper changes made so that it can
> exist with the slink libreadlineg2 ASAP.
>
> Jason
> From: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@ualberta.ca>
> To: Georg Bauer <gb@hugo.westfalen.de>
> cc: 42779@bugs.debian.org, APT Development Team <deity@lists.debian.org>
> Subject: Re: Bug#42779: apt: apt-cdrom doesn't scan CD right
>
> On Tue, 10 Aug 1999, Georg Bauer wrote:
>
> > On Tue, 10 Aug 1999 13:42:11 -0600 (MDT) jgg@ualberta.ca (Jason Gunthorpe)
> > wrote:
> >
> > >Bah, better send a strace too :<
> >
> > Ok, attached. out1.gz is stdout, out2.gz is stderr. Have fun ;-)
>
> Yes, I see the problem now. These CDs are Evil and do not contain the
> 'Packages' file, only the .gz version. Fortunately, I belive my new new
> code actually handles this..
>
> Try the apt 0.3.11.1 from http://www.debian.org/~jgg/ - it should
> hopefully work.
>
> Jason
> From: owner@bugs.debian.org (Debian Bug Tracking System)
> To: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@ualberta.ca>
> Cc: APT Development Team <deity@lists.debian.org>
> Subject: Bug#42719: marked as done (No appropriate error message when trying to apt-get install kdelibs2g)
>
> Your message dated Thu, 12 Aug 1999 01:08:52 -0600 (MDT)
> with message-id <Pine.LNX.3.96.990812010745.2211P-100000@Wakko.deltatee.com>
> and subject line No appropriate error message when trying to apt-get install kdelibs2g
> 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'm
> talking about this indicates a serious mail system misconfiguration
> somewhere. Please contact me immediately.)
>
> Ian Jackson
> (administrator, Debian bugs database)
>
> Received: (at submit) by bugs.debian.org; 9 Aug 1999 16:42:21 +0000
> Received: (qmail 14268 invoked from network); 9 Aug 1999 16:42:19 -0000
> Received: from mout0.01019freenet.de (exim@62.104.201.5)
> by master.debian.org with SMTP; 9 Aug 1999 16:42:19 -0000
> Received: from [62.104.201.2] (helo=mx1.01019freenet.de)
> by mout0.01019freenet.de with esmtp (Exim 3.03 #1)
> id 11DsTW-0002HP-00
> for submit@bugs.debian.org; Mon, 09 Aug 1999 18:40:38 +0200
> Received: from [194.97.109.169] (helo=zappa.roka.net)
> by mx1.01019freenet.de with smtp (Exim 3.03 #1)
> id 11DsTV-0007ks-00
> for submit@bugs.debian.org; Mon, 09 Aug 1999 18:40:37 +0200
> Received: (qmail 29884 invoked by uid 1000); 9 Aug 1999 16:40:13 -0000
> Sender: marc@zappa.roka.net
> To: submit@bugs.debian.org
> Cc: Rainer Nagel <rainer@roka.net>
> Subject: No appropriate error message when trying to apt-get install kdelibs2g
> From: Marc Packenius <marc@roka.net>
> Organization: roka EDV und Datenkommunikationsberatung GmbH
> Date: 09 Aug 1999 18:40:13 +0200
> Message-ID: <87iu6oj4b6.fsf@zappa.roka.net>
> Lines: 29
> User-Agent: Gnus/5.070095 (Pterodactyl Gnus v0.95) XEmacs/21.1 (20 Minutes to Nikko)
> MIME-Version: 1.0
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
>
> Hi!
>
> Using potato:
>
> zappa:/etc/qmail# uname -a
> Linux zappa 2.2.10 #7 Mon Jul 19 14:20:54 CEST 1999 i686 unknown
> zappa:/etc/qmail# apt-get --version
> apt 0.3.11 for i386 compiled on Jun 28 1999 21:59:55
> zappa:/etc/qmail# dpkg -l \*kdelibs\*
> Desired=Unknown/Install/Remove/Purge
> | Status=Not/Installed/Config-files/Unpacked/Failed-config/Half-installed
> |/ Err?=(none)/Hold/Reinst-required/X=both-problems (Status,Err: uppercase=bad)
> ||/ Name Version Description
> +++-===============-==============-============================================
> un kdelibs0-dev <none> (no description available)
> un kdelibs2g <none> (no description available)
> un kdelibs2g-dev <none> (no description available)
> zappa:/etc/qmail# apt-get install kdelibs2g
> Reading Package Lists... Done
> Building Dependency Tree... Done
> E: Couldn't find package kdelibs2g
>
> My understanding is that apt-get should tell me that it couldn't find
> an installation candidate for the requested package - or that the
> package shouldn't be in the package list in the first place.
>
> --
> Marc Packenius, Qualitätssicherung, roka GmbH, Elbestr. 25, 47800 Krefeld
> marc@roka.net, Tel. +49-2151-4975-624, Fax +49-2151-4975-89
> From: Thomas Quinot <thomas@debian.org>
> To: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@ualberta.ca>
> Cc: Debian Developers <debian-devel@lists.debian.org>,
> Debian Users List <debian-user@lists.debian.org>,
> Deity Creation Team <deity@lists.debian.org>
> Subject: Re: WARNING: APT removes bash on slink upgrade
>
> Le 1999-08-12, Jason Gunthorpe écrivait :
>
> > This is due to a recent bash NMU which now pre-depends on the potato
> > libreadlineg2 which conflicts with the slink bash.
> >
> > Bash -MUST- be re-uploaded with the proper changes made so that it can
> > exist with the slink libreadlineg2 ASAP.
>
> This is not so simple. Bash is unusable with slink's libreadline.
> Three bugs of severity important existed in the BTS for this
> problem, which the recent NMU attempts to fix: #35130, #39280, #41802.
>
> On the other hand, the current libreadline is binary-incompatible
> with the slink bash, so the conflicts: cannot be removed; the
> major version on libreadline should have been bumped when
> libreadline was first compiled against glibc 2.1.
>
> More generally, it is unfortunate that such intricated dependencies
> exist between bash and libreadline, with bash being a package of
> paramount importance for the operation of the whole system.
> Maybe it would be preferrable to link bash statically and get rid
> of its dependency on readline. On the other hand, such important
> change is far out of the scope of an NMU.
>
> For now I can reupload bash with the latest change undone. Unfortunately,
> this means that an important problem which renders bash unusable will
> have to stay open.
>
> --
> Thomas.Quinot@Cuivre.FR.EU.ORG <URL:http://web.fdn.fr/~tquinot/>
> From: Decklin Foster <decklin@home.com>
> To: submit@bugs.debian.org
> Subject: Bug#42891: apt-get should understand multiple actions on one command line
>
> Package: apt
> Version: 0.3.11
> Severity: wishlist
>
> With make, it's possible to specify multiple actions on the command
> line, i.e. "make clean all" or "make dep zImage modules". It would be
> nice if I could do this with apt-get, i.e. "apt-get update upgrade".
> At the very least, apt should complain when I try to do that. :-)
>
> --
> Debian GNU/Linux - http://www.debian.org/
> The Web is to graphic design as the fax machine is to literature.
> From: Julian Gilbey <J.D.Gilbey@qmw.ac.uk>
> To: thomas@debian.org
> Cc: jgg@ualberta.ca, debian-devel@lists.debian.org,
> debian-user@lists.debian.org, deity@lists.debian.org
> Subject: Re: WARNING: APT removes bash on slink upgrade
>
> [Charset iso-8859-1 unsupported, filtering to ASCII...]
> > Le 1999-08-12, Jason Gunthorpe _crivait :
> >
> > > This is due to a recent bash NMU which now pre-depends on the potato
> > > libreadlineg2 which conflicts with the slink bash.
> > >
> > > Bash -MUST- be re-uploaded with the proper changes made so that it can
> > > exist with the slink libreadlineg2 ASAP.
> >
> > This is not so simple. Bash is unusable with slink's libreadline.
> > Three bugs of severity important existed in the BTS for this
> > problem, which the recent NMU attempts to fix: #35130, #39280, #41802.
> >
> > On the other hand, the current libreadline is binary-incompatible
> > with the slink bash, so the conflicts: cannot be removed; the
> > major version on libreadline should have been bumped when
> > libreadline was first compiled against glibc 2.1.
> >
> > More generally, it is unfortunate that such intricated dependencies
> > exist between bash and libreadline, with bash being a package of
> > paramount importance for the operation of the whole system.
> > Maybe it would be preferrable to link bash statically and get rid
> > of its dependency on readline. On the other hand, such important
> > change is far out of the scope of an NMU.
> >
> > For now I can reupload bash with the latest change undone. Unfortunately,
> > this means that an important problem which renders bash unusable will
> > have to stay open.
>
> >From what I recall from the GNU ftp site, bash-2.04 includes
> libreadline-4.0, so the major number *has* been bumped up. Perhaps we
> could switch to that which might alleviate this problem?
>
> Julian
>
> =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
>
> Julian Gilbey, Dept of Maths, QMW, Univ. of London. J.D.Gilbey@qmw.ac.uk
> Debian GNU/Linux Developer, see http://www.debian.org/~jdg
> From: Guy Hulbert <guy@bioinfo.sickkids.on.ca>
> To: deity@lists.debian.org
> cc: dpkg-maint@chiark.greenend.org.uk
> Subject: APT vs DSELECT ?
>
> Hi Deity.
>
> [ sorry this is a little long -- please reply-to: guy@interlog.com but
> cc: me here, thanks ]
>
> I'd like to see a page on APT vs DSELECT on the debian site as I could
> not find this issue discussed in either the FAQ or the FAQOMATIC pages.
>
> I am willing to write this and submit it to the appropriate person. I've
> used texinfo, sgml-tools, ... in the past so, ... you can choose the format.
>
> This mail is addressed to the maintainer of APT according to the 'mailto':
> http://www.debian.org/Packages/stable/admin/apt.html
> the search engine does not pickup 'dselect' as a package so I've copied
> the corresponding address for 'dpkg'.
>
> Why ?
> =====
>
> Background
> ----------
>
> I have been using Debian since 0.93r6. I've been using linux since SLS 1.03.
> [ I've been using free software since 1984 (TeX, emacs a year later) ]. I
> switched to redhat a bit less than 12 months ago because it was hard to
> get up-to-date Debian CDs but I've since found a good source, which actually
> contributes to Debian as well.
>
> Reasons [ long-winded :( ]
> -------
>
> Please don't take this personally, but dselect is HORRIBLE. I showed
> debian to three co-workers in late 1995 and no-one was impressed (a couple
> of them started using debian because of the quality of the rest of the
> distribution --- the other uses RedHat because he believes marketing and
> usability is important). I use Debian because it is 'free' in RMS' sense (and
> because some RedHat packages don't work).
>
> I'd heard that APT was going to replace DSELECT and assumed that it would
> be the default in slink ... but it is not. I've seen people raving about
> it and I understand that there is a version available for slink so I will
> look at it.
>
> Because I found dselect so awful, I've never looked much at dpkg. Between
> SLS and Debian I used BOGUS. I was able to build the entire BOGUS distribution
> from source code using only:
> - 5 or 6 binary packages (it was impossible to build entirely using SLS
> because the include files, libraries etc. were too far out of date)
> - shell scripts to run the package management tool [1]
> To me, this is what "open source" [2], is (or should be) all about.
>
> I am now interested in looking more closely into dpkg for various reasons.
> I've been reading and participating in debian-hurd for about a year but I
> have been too busy to get the hurd installed at home so my participation is
> somewhat limited. Debian-hurd is committed to dpkg at the moment.
> I'm tentatively planning to use 'rpm' at work because I've seen a reference
> to someone using it on other unices (;login, Jan 99). Up 'til now I've been
> using my own tool to do this but I haven't had time to develop it. However,
> if I can easily do with 'dpkg' what I want to do with 'rpm' then I will have
> to choose.
>
> Sincerly,
>
> ----
> Guy Hulbert, Project Manager [3] Bioinformatics Supercomputing Centre
> (416) 813-8876 555 University Avenue
> email: guy@bioinfo.sickkids.on.ca The Hospital for Sick Children
> http: www.bioinfo.sickkids.on.ca Toronto, ON, M5G 1X8, CANADA.
>
> [1] 'pms' from which 'rpm' is indirectly derived.
> [2] I prefer the term 'free-software'.
> [3] Project Manager = Sys Admin :)
> From: Bernd Kreimeier <bk@gamers.org>
> To: oel Klecker and others <debian-glibc@lists.debian.org>
> Cc: APT Development Team <deity@lists.debian.org>
> Subject: bogus dependency
>
> Either apt is optional, or it is not?
>
> b.
>
>
>
> dpkg: regarding libc6_2.1.2-0pre7.deb containing libc6:
> libc6 conflicts with apt (<< 0.3.0)
> apt (version 0.1.9) is installed.
> dpkg: error processing libc6_2.1.2-0pre7.deb (--install):
> conflicting packages - not installing libc6
>
> Package: apt
> Status: install ok installed
> Priority: optional
> From: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@ualberta.ca>
> To: Bernd Kreimeier <bk@gamers.org>
> cc: oel Klecker and others <debian-glibc@lists.debian.org>,
> APT Development Team <deity@lists.debian.org>
> Subject: Re: bogus dependency
>
> On Sat, 14 Aug 1999, Bernd Kreimeier wrote:
>
> > Either apt is optional, or it is not?
>
> You have to use apt to perform the upgrade and hope nothing goes wrong as
> it removes itself.
>
> Jason
> From: Dale Scheetz <dwarf@polaris.net>
> To: Bernd Kreimeier <bk@gamers.org>
> cc: oel Klecker and others <debian-glibc@lists.debian.org>,
> APT Development Team <deity@lists.debian.org>
> Subject: Re: bogus dependency
>
> On Sat, 14 Aug 1999, Bernd Kreimeier wrote:
>
> >
> >
> >
> > Either apt is optional, or it is not?
> >
> Well, it _is_ optional. Why do you think packages should not conflict with
> optional packages? The reason libc does this is because if you install the
> new libc apt will break. This is undesirable, as you may be currently
> using it to do the installation, thus the conflict. What would you have it
> do instead?
>
> Luck,
> > b.
> >
> >
> >
> > dpkg: regarding libc6_2.1.2-0pre7.deb containing libc6:
> > libc6 conflicts with apt (<< 0.3.0)
> > apt (version 0.1.9) is installed.
> > dpkg: error processing libc6_2.1.2-0pre7.deb (--install):
> > conflicting packages - not installing libc6
> >
> > Package: apt
> > Status: install ok installed
> > Priority: optional
> >
> >
> > --
> > To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-glibc-request@lists.debian.org
> > with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
> >
> >
> >
>
> Dwarf
> --
> _-_-_-_-_- Author of "The Debian Linux User's Guide" _-_-_-_-_-_-
>
> aka Dale Scheetz Phone: 1 (850) 656-9769
> Flexible Software 11000 McCrackin Road
> e-mail: dwarf@polaris.net Tallahassee, FL 32308
>
> _-_-_-_-_-_- See www.linuxpress.com for more details _-_-_-_-_-_-_-
> From: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@ualberta.ca>
> To: Havoc Pennington <rhp@zirx.pair.com>
> cc: Deity Creation Team <deity@lists.debian.org>
> Subject: Re: gnome-apt
>
> On Wed, 11 Aug 1999, Havoc Pennington wrote:
>
> > Yeah the pkgAcquire::Run can return cancelled. I think I made that change
> > actually, but I could have sworn I updated gnome-apt to reflect it; I
> > don't know how I didn't. Blah.
>
> You did make that change, I'm shocked your code didn't get updated :>
>
> Jason
> k
> From: "Darren/Torin/Who Ever..." <torin@daft.com>
> To: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@ualberta.ca>
> Cc: 42723@bugs.debian.org, Chris McKillop <cdmckill@warg.uwaterloo.ca>,
> keyoz@iln.csi.com.ph, debian-devel@lists.debian.org
> Subject: Bug#42723: wish for apt
>
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>
> Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@ualberta.ca>, in an immanent manifestation of deity, wrote:
> >Er, that's 'upgrade' you are thinking of. He wants a feature like dselect
> >has - but I think I will have to refuse - that is something that belongs
> >in a GUI, not a command line tool like APT.
>
> But it'd be nice if libapt had a method for doing this so it doesn't get
> re-implemented 15 times.
>
> Darren
> - --
> <torin@daft.com> <http://www.daft.com/~torin> <torin@debian.org> <torin@io.com>
> Darren Stalder/2608 Second Ave, @282/Seattle, WA 98121-1212/USA/+1-800-921-4996
> @ Sysadmin, webweaver, postmaster for hire. C/Perl/CGI/Pilot programmer/tutor @
> @ Make a little hot-tub in your soul. @
>
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: 2.6.3a
> Charset: noconv
> Comment: Processed by Mailcrypt 3.5.1, an Emacs/PGP interface
>
> iQCVAwUBN7koMo4wrq++1Ls5AQGkRgP/SmfDbrPfWvovJIuPHZwT72ct/eJmAuBA
> ftAUQeDbkBPVly8gAYCbWW1eo0PxbKtAYIWIGtvum2YMOaMzlel6f1KiZKJ4BrbB
> Mm2N5wbn8yxNTi9yejVPkqJ0l8m8DqjDNWfIgXKOJRkEQIRnbp4GQ7f7Oi3w29kH
> duukeJVdYOI=
> =UgZK
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
> From: Wichert Akkerman <wichert@cs.leidenuniv.nl>
> To: submit@bugs.debian.org
> Subject: Bug#43130: apt: weird progressmeter
>
> Package: apt
> Version: 0.3.11
> Severity: normal
>
> root@lightning:~# apt-get install bind-doc
> Reading Package Lists... Done
> Building Dependency Tree... Done
> The following NEW packages will be installed:
> bind-doc
> 0 packages upgraded, 1 newly installed, 0 to remove and 15 not upgraded.
> Need to get 0B/897kB of archives. After unpacking 1079kB will be used.
> Err cdrom:Debian GNU_Linux slink (2.1) 1_4 main binary-i386 section 1 SAM19990306/ debian/dists/frozen/main/binary-i386/ bind-doc 8.1.2-2
> Unable to change to /scdrom/ - chdir (2 No such file or directory)
> Get:1 http://samosa.debian.org stable/main bind-doc 8.1.2-2 [897kB]
> 15397350% [1 bind-doc 307947/897kB 34%] 5672B/s 8d 18h19m14s
>
> That progress-meter is quite... curious :)
>
> Wichert.
>
> -- System Information
> Debian Release: potato
> Kernel Version: Linux lightning 2.2.7 #3 Wed Jul 7 01:43:21 CEST 1999 i586 unknown
>
> Versions of the packages apt depends on:
> ii libc6 2.1.2-0pre5 GNU C Library: Shared libraries and timezone
> ii libstdc++2.9-gl 2.91.66-2 The GNU stdc++ library (EGCS version)
> From: Sander Smeenk <fluor@infinity.iaf.nl>
> To: apt@packages.debian.org
> Subject: apt-move script?
>
> Hi,
>
> Is it possible to repack all packages on my 2.2 system with dpkg-repack,
> and use apt-get on another (Debian 2.1) machine to upgrade that system to
> Debian version 2.2?
>
> I heard there is a script to do this. I tried it without that script, but
> apt-get complained about broken MD5Sums, since I used dpkg-repack.
>
> Doesn't apt-get have a secret option --no-md5sum-check?
> I know what I am doing, and if I mess up that Debian 2.1 system,
> there is no problem anyway.
>
> I don't feel like downloading all the packages again,
> with my 33k6 connection.
>
> Please help!
>
> Ltr!
> (-(Fluor)-)
>
> --
> | Tell a man there are 300 billion stars in the galaxy and he'll beleive you
> | Tell a man a bench has wet paint, and he'll have to touch to be sure.
> |
> | Linux: Reach out and GREP someone!
> From: Matt Porter <mmporter@home.com>
> To: deity@lists.debian.org
> Subject: Building CVS apt
>
> I'm trying out YACS to build some potato CD's on a powerpc box (that's all
> I really have available) and it requires apt 0.3.11.1. Building from the
> latest CVS apt yields the following:
> -----
> two00:/usr/local/src/apt# autoconf
> configure.in:98: warning: AC_TRY_RUN called without default to allow cross
> compiling
> two00:/usr/local/src/apt# ./configure
> loading cache ./config.cache
> ./configure: tl_CHECK_TOOL_PREFIX: command not found
> ./configure: tl_PROG_CC: command not found
> checking for gcc... gcc
> checking whether the C compiler (gcc ) works... yes
> checking whether the C compiler (gcc ) is a cross-compiler... no
> checking whether we are using GNU C... yes
> checking whether gcc accepts -g... yes
> checking for POSIXized ISC... no
> ./configure: tl_CANONICAL_HOST: command not found
> ./configure: tl_CHECK_TOOL_PREFIX: command not found
> ./configure: tl_PROG_CXX: command not found
> checking how to run the C++ preprocessor... g++ -E
> checking for X... libraries /usr/X11R6/lib, headers /usr/X11R6/include
> checking for dnet_ntoa in -ldnet... no
> checking for dnet_ntoa in -ldnet_stub... no
> checking for gethostbyname... yes
> checking for connect... yes
> checking for remove... yes
> checking for shmat... yes
> checking for IceConnectionNumber in -lICE... yes
> checking for XpmLibraryVersion in -lXpm... yes
> checking for SLang_Version in -lslang... no
> checking for Gpm_Open in -lgpm... yes
> checking system architecture... configure: error: failed: use --host=
> two00:/usr/local/src/apt#
>
> At this point explicitly passing the host platform doesn't help at all,
> same problem configuring. I sure would be happy to hear what dumb mistake
> I'm making. :)
>
> Thanks,
> --
> Matt Porter
> mmporter@home.com
> This is Linux Country. On a quiet night, you can hear Windows reboot.
> From: Thomas Schoepf <schoepf@informatik.tu-muenchen.de>
> To: 41839@bugs.debian.org
> cc: kaih@khms.westfalen.de, Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@ualberta.ca>
> Subject: Bug#41839: apt: apt-get reinstalls packages
>
> Hi,
>
>
> this is really a bug. I'm facing it too:
>
> On my system, qt1g_1.44-5 is installed. It's available through two
> different apt lines:
>
> deb http://kde.tdyc.com potato kde contrib
> deb ftp://ftp.leo.org/pub/comp/os/unix/linux/Debian/debian potato main
>
> The latter only offers qt1g_1.44-4 (instead of -5).
>
> Everytime I run 'apt-get dist-upgrade' apt wants to download qt1g_1.44-5:
>
> asterix:~# dpkg -l qt1g | grep ^ii
> ii qt1g 1.44-5 Shared Library used by applications linked w
> asterix:~# apt-cache showpkg qt1g | grep ^Versions:
> Versions: 1.44-5(/var/state/apt/lists/kde.tdyc.com_dists_potato_kde_binary-i386_Packages),1.44-5(/var/lib/dpkg/status),1.44-4(/var/state/apt/lists/ftp.leo.org_pub_comp_os_unix_linux_Debian_debian_dists_potato_non-free_binary-i386_Packages),
> asterix:~# apt-get dist-upgrade
> Reading Package Lists... Done
> Building Dependency Tree... Done
> Calculating Upgrade... Done
> 1 packages upgraded, 0 newly installed, 0 to remove and 0 not upgraded.
> Need to get 721kB of archives. After unpacking 1024B will be used.
> Do you want to continue? [Y/n]
> Err http://kde.tdyc.com potato/kde qt1g 1.44-5
> Could not resolve 'wwwcache.informatik.tu-muenchen.de'
> Failed to fetch
> http://kde.tdyc.com/dists/potato/kde/binary-i386/libs/qt1g_1.44-5_i386.deb
> Could not resolve 'wwwcache.informatik.tu-muenchen.de'
> E: Unable to fetch some archives, maybe try with --fix-missing?
> asterix:~#
>
> (Ignore those "Err" messages, my system was offline.)
>
> My /etc/apt/sources.list:
>
> # Use for a local mirror - remove the ftp1 http lines for the bits
> # your mirror contains.
> # deb file:/your/mirror/here/debian stable main contrib non-free
> # See sources.list(5) for more information, especial
> # Remember that you can only use http, ftp or file URIs
> #deb http://http.us.debian.org/debian stable main contrib non-free
> deb file:/home/schoepf/debian/ local/
> #deb http://ftp.de.debian.org/debian potato main contrib non-free
> deb ftp://ftp.leo.org/pub/comp/os/unix/linux/Debian/debian potato main contrib non-free
> # Non-US
> deb http://nonus.debian.org/debian-non-US/ potato/non-US main contrib non-free
> # Debian/KDE
> deb http://kde.tdyc.com potato kde contrib
>
>
> Thomas
> --
> From: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@ualberta.ca>
> To: Thomas Schoepf <schoepf@informatik.tu-muenchen.de>
> cc: 41839@bugs.debian.org
> Subject: Bug#41839: apt: apt-get reinstalls packages
>
> On Thu, 19 Aug 1999, Thomas Schoepf wrote:
>
> > this is really a bug. I'm facing it too:
> >
> > On my system, qt1g_1.44-5 is installed. It's available through two
> > different apt lines:
> >
> > deb http://kde.tdyc.com potato kde contrib
> > deb ftp://ftp.leo.org/pub/comp/os/unix/linux/Debian/debian potato main
> >
> > The latter only offers qt1g_1.44-4 (instead of -5).
>
> Please try out the 0.3.11.1 version of APT found at
> http://www.debian.org/~jgg/
>
> Jason
> From: Thomas Schoepf <schoepf@informatik.tu-muenchen.de>
> To: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@ualberta.ca>
> cc: 41839@bugs.debian.org
> Subject: Bug#41839: apt: apt-get reinstalls packages
>
> On Thu, 19 Aug 1999, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
>
> > Please try out the 0.3.11.1 version of APT found at
> > http://www.debian.org/~jgg/
>
> Sorry, doesn't fix it. apt still tries to download qt1g_1.44-5.
>
>
> Thomas
> --
> From: Tatsuya Maruyama <paz@mapletown.net>
> To: maintonly@bugs.debian.org
> Subject: Bug#43251: apt: desc.apt has typo
>
> Package: apt
> Version: 0.3.11
>
> /usr/lib/dpkg/methods/apt/desc.apt has a typo:
>
> > sources. See the man pages apt-get(8) and source.list(5)
>
> sources.list(5)
> ^
> ---
> Tatsuya Maruyama (paz@mapletown.net)
> From: pimlott@idiomtech.com
> To: submit@bugs.debian.org
> Subject: Bug#43275: apt: apt does not offer to add security updates to sources.list
>
> Package: apt
> Version: 0.3.11
> Severity: wishlist
>
> apt should offer a configuration that makes it easy to install security
> updates regularly. According to http://www.debian.org/security/ , the
> official sources.list line is
>
> deb http://security.debian.org/ stable updates
>
> However, I'm sure that many users never add this, and don't otherwise keep
> up on Debian security bulletins. This represents a great number of
> potentially insecure machines that could be eliminated with this
> sources.list line and, optionally, a cron task. This configuration
> shouldn't be forced on everyone, but should be an option (at install time)
> for those who would otherwise ignore security updates completely.
>
> Although administrators of important systems may prefer not to be upgraded
> automatically, Debian can with this simple measure protect casual users from
> common exploits.
>
> Andrew
>
> -- System Information
> Debian Release: potato
> Kernel Version: Linux nolfolan 2.2.10 #2 Mon Jun 21 18:24:15 EDT 1999 i686 unknown
>
> Versions of the packages apt depends on:
> ii libc6 2.1.2-0pre7 GNU C Library: Shared libraries and timezone
> ii libstdc++2.9-gl 2.91.66-2 The GNU stdc++ library (EGCS version)
> From: Levi <levi@top.monad.net>
> To: apt@packages.debian.org
> Subject: Data socket timeouts
>
> I have a suggestion for improving apt's FTP method. Why not, instead of
> giving up on a file when there's a data socket timeout, simply resume the
> file where it left off (or whatever it is that normal ftp does). I'd do it
> myself, but my C++ skills are rather lacking *sigh*. Let me know what you
> think.
>
> -Levi
> From: Amy Fong <afong@furryterror.org>
> To: submit@bugs.debian.org
> Subject: Bug#43286: apt installing virtual pkg msg bug?
>
> Package: apt
> Version: 0.3.11
> Severity: normal
>
> # apt-get install gnome-desktop
> Reading Package Lists... Done
> Building Dependency Tree... Done
> Package gnome-desktop has no available version, but exists in the
> database.
> This typically means that the package was mentioned in a dependency and
> never uploaded, or that it is an obsolete package.
> However the following packages replace it:
> gnome-control-center gnome-control-center gnome-control-center
>
> The same package that provides the virtual package is repeated 2 timmes.
>
> potato, kernel 2.2.10, libc6 2.1.2-0pre7
> From: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@ualberta.ca>
> To: Levi <levi@top.monad.net>
> cc: Deity Creation Team <deity@lists.debian.org>
> Subject: Re: Data socket timeouts
>
> On Sat, 21 Aug 1999, Levi wrote:
>
> > I have a suggestion for improving apt's FTP method. Why not, instead of
> > giving up on a file when there's a data socket timeout, simply resume the
> > file where it left off (or whatever it is that normal ftp does). I'd do it
> > myself, but my C++ skills are rather lacking *sigh*. Let me know what you
> > think.
>
> Add acquire::retries "10"; to the config file and it will, see the man
> page for apt.conf.
>
> Jason
> From: Georg Bauer <gb@hugo.westfalen.de>
> To: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@ualberta.ca>, Georg Bauer <gb@hugo.westfalen.de>
> cc: 42779@bugs.debian.org, APT Development Team <deity@lists.debian.org>
> Subject: Re: Bug#42779: apt: apt-cdrom doesn't scan CD right
>
> On Thu, 12 Aug 1999 01:04:55 -0600 (MDT) jgg@ualberta.ca (Jason Gunthorpe)
> wrote:
>
> >Try the apt 0.3.11.1 from http://www.debian.org/~jgg/ - it should
> >hopefully work.
>
> I fetched the 0.3.11.1 from your site. This is the result:
>
> goggle# apt-cdrom -m -d /home/ftp/cdrom1 add
> Using CD-ROM mount point /home/ftp/cdrom1/
> Identifying.. [6b6f3b8d3d26e1f4c32eb23d1ba3f9d2-2]
> Scanning Disc for index files.. Found 1 package indexes and 0 source
> indexes.
> Please provide a name for this Disc, such as 'Debian 2.1r1 Disk 1':
> Debian 2.1r1 Disk 1
> This Disc is called 'Debian 2.1r1 Disk 1'
> E: Failed to stat /home/ftp/cdrom1/Packages - stat (2 No such file or
> directory)
> E: Stat failed for /home/ftp/cdrom1/Packages - stat (2 No such file or
> directory)
>
>
> Not fully there, but a bit closer ...
>
> bye, Georg
>
> --
> http://www.westfalen.de/hugo/
> From: Lazarus Long <lazarus@overdue.dhis.org>
> To: submit@bugs.debian.org
> Subject: Bug#43356: apt: security
>
> Package: apt
> Version: 0.3.11
> Severity: wishlist
>
> ===
> <usual> santa: to get those security updates does it do it by itself when i upgrade or do i have to do a apt-get install blah?
> <lazarus> apt, security?
> <apt> Debian provides security updates. To obtain updated packages,
> insert 'deb http://security.debian.org stable updates' into
> /etc/apt/sources.list
> ===
>
> Shouldn't that line ship as part of the stock sources.list?
>
> If there is some reason not to include it, please at least consider
> including it in a commented-out form.
>
> -- System Information
> Debian Release: potato
> Kernel Version: Linux phoenix 2.2.11 #1 Sun Aug 15 10:47:40 UTC 1999 i586 unknown
>
> Versions of the packages apt depends on:
> ii libc6 2.1.2-0pre10 GNU C Library: Shared libraries and timezone
> ii libstdc++2.9-gl 2.91.66-2 The GNU stdc++ library (EGCS version)
> From: Enterprise Mail Account <olly@lfix.co.uk>
> To: submit@bugs.debian.org
> Subject: Bug#43368: gnome-apt: gnome-apt does not mark any packages for upgrading
>
> Package: gnome-apt
> Version: 0.3.4
> Severity: normal
>
> After an update, there is a beep. The update appears to have been
> assimilated, since apt-get sees the updated package files, but gnome-apt
> refuses to mark anything for upgrade (or smart upgrade).
>
> This error has been happening for a couple of weeks.
>
> These are the final messages at the end of updating:
> Fail http://www.mirror.ac.uk potato/contrib Release
> Hit http://www.mirror.ac.uk potato/non-free Sources
> Fail http://www.mirror.ac.uk potato/non-free Release
> Stop
> Gnome Apt Frontend-DEBUG: setting up vadjustment
>
> -- System Information
> Debian Release: potato
> Kernel Version: Linux linda 2.2.10 #2 SMP Fri Aug 6 00:06:44 BST 1999 i686 unknown
>
> Versions of the packages gnome-apt depends on:
> ii apt 0.3.11 Advanced front-end for dpkg
> ii gdk-imlib1 1.9.5-1 Gdk-Imlib is an imaging library for use with
> ii libart2 1.0.10-3 The Gnome canvas widget
> ii libaudiofile0 0.1.7-2 The Audiofile Library
> ii libc6 2.1.2-0pre7 GNU C Library: Shared libraries and timezone
> ii libesd0 0.2.10-0.19990 Enlightened Sound Daemon - Shared libraries
> ii libglib1.2 1.2.3-2 The GLib library of C routines
> ii libgnome32 1.0.10-3 The Gnome libraries
> ii libgnomesupport 1.0.10-3 The Gnome libraries (Support libraries)
> ii libgnomeui32 1.0.10-3 The Gnome libraries (User Interface)
> ii libgtk1.2 1.2.3-2 The GIMP Toolkit set of widgets for X
> ii libstdc++2.9-gl 2.91.66-2 The GNU stdc++ library (EGCS version)
> ii libzvt2 1.0.10-3 The Gnome zvt (zterm) widget
> ii xlib6g 3.3.3.1-10 shared libraries required by X clients
> ii zlib1g 1.1.3-4 compression library - runtime
> ii apt 0.3.11 Advanced front-end for dpkg
> ^^^ (Provides virtual package libapt-pkg2.5)
>
> /etc/apt/sources.list:
> deb http://www.mirror.ac.uk/sites/ftp.debian.org/debian slink main contrib non-free
> deb http://www.mirror.ac.uk/sites/ftp.debian.org/debian potato main contrib non-free
> deb ftp://non-us.debian.org/debian-non-US dists/stable/non-US/binary-$(ARCH)/
> deb ftp://non-us.debian.org/debian-non-US dists/unstable/non-US/main/binary-$(ARCH)/
> deb ftp://non-us.debian.org/debian-non-US dists/unstable/non-US/contrib/binary-$(ARCH)/
> deb ftp://non-us.debian.org/debian-non-US dists/unstable/non-US/non-free/binary-$(ARCH)/
> deb-src http://www.mirror.ac.uk/sites/ftp.debian.org/debian slink main contrib non-free
> deb-src http://www.mirror.ac.uk/sites/ftp.debian.org/debian potato main contrib non-free
> deb-src ftp://non-us.debian.org/debian-non-US dists/stable/non-US/source/
> deb-src ftp://non-us.debian.org/debian-non-US dists/unstable/non-US/main/source/
> deb-src ftp://non-us.debian.org/debian-non-US dists/unstable/non-US/contrib/source/
> deb-src ftp://non-us.debian.org/debian-non-US dists/unstable/non-US/non-free/source/
> From: Matthew Hawkins <matt@mail.goldweb.com.au>
> To: deity@lists.debian.org
> Subject: apt-get and rproxy
>
> An apt-get update bombs with 'Connection failed' when the http_proxy
> env. var. points at rproxy. The http data is flowing between the
> rproxies correctly, it appears that apt-get is simply unable to deal
> with it.
>
> rproxy is available from anon CVS at cvs.samba.org.
>
> If there's any debugging things I can give to help I'm happy to oblige.
>
> --
> Matt
> From: Michele Dalla Silvestra <dalla@keycomm.it>
> To: APT Development Team <deity@lists.debian.org>
> Subject: Syntax error in description file
>
> In the file /usr/lib/dpkg/methods/apt/desc.apt the string
> "source.list(5)" must be rewritten as "sources.list(5)".
>
>
> Michele
> From: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@ualberta.ca>
> To: Matthew Hawkins <matt@mail.goldweb.com.au>
> cc: deity@lists.debian.org
> Subject: Re: apt-get and rproxy
>
> On Mon, 23 Aug 1999, Matthew Hawkins wrote:
>
> > An apt-get update bombs with 'Connection failed' when the http_proxy
> > env. var. points at rproxy. The http data is flowing between the
> > rproxies correctly, it appears that apt-get is simply unable to deal
> > with it.
>
> Almost every proxy out there seems to have problems dealing with APT's
> very agressive use of HTTP/1.1 features such as keepalive. AFAIK APT does
> not violate the RFC, is it just the only agressive user of HTTP/1.1 out
> there.
>
> wwoffle and apache-proxy have problems, squid and many others do not, I
> suggest you strace the http method process and see what system call is
> causing it to print that error..
>
> Jason
> From: Havoc Pennington <rhp@zirx.pair.com>
> To: Enterprise Mail Account <olly@lfix.co.uk>, 43368@bugs.debian.org
> cc: Apt Packaging Team <apt@packages.debian.org>
> Subject: Re: Bug#43368: gnome-apt: gnome-apt does not mark any packages for
> upgrading
>
> On Mon, 23 Aug 1999, Enterprise Mail Account wrote:
> > Package: gnome-apt
> > Version: 0.3.4
> > Severity: normal
> >
> > After an update, there is a beep. The update appears to have been
> > assimilated, since apt-get sees the updated package files, but gnome-apt
> > refuses to mark anything for upgrade (or smart upgrade).
> >
> > This error has been happening for a couple of weeks.
> >
>
> Hmm, can you clarify this for me - you mean you choose the "update" menu
> item, then "mark upgrades," and no upgrades are marked?
>
> Or do you mean you do "Complete Run" and dpkg isn't run (this bug is fixed
> in CVS).
>
> It sounds like you're saying you choose "update" from the menu and no
> upgrades are marked, which is the correct behavior; you have to then
> choose "mark upgrades" to mark the upgrades.
>
> Thanks,
> Havoc
> From: David Luyer <luyer@ucs.uwa.edu.au>
> To: submit@bugs.debian.org
> Subject: Bug#43476: apt-get doesn't honour no_proxy env setting
>
> Package: apt
> Version: 0.3.11
>
> apt-get when using the http and ftp methods honours the ftp_proxy and
> http_proxy environment variables but doesn't check no_proxy. this can
> cause downloading of new packages to fail.
>
> David.
> From: "Oliver Elphick" <olly@lfix.co.uk>
> To: Havoc Pennington <rhp@zirx.pair.com>
> cc: Enterprise Mail Account <olly@lfix.co.uk>, 43368@bugs.debian.org,
> Apt Packaging Team <apt@packages.debian.org>
> Subject: Re: Bug#43368: gnome-apt: gnome-apt does not mark any packages for
> upgrading
>
> Havoc Pennington wrote:
> >
> >On Mon, 23 Aug 1999, Enterprise Mail Account wrote:
> >> Package: gnome-apt
> >> Version: 0.3.4
> >> Severity: normal
> >>
> >> After an update, there is a beep. The update appears to have been
> >> assimilated, since apt-get sees the updated package files, but gnome-apt
> >> refuses to mark anything for upgrade (or smart upgrade).
> ...
> >
> >Hmm, can you clarify this for me - you mean you choose the "update" menu
> >item, then "mark upgrades," and no upgrades are marked?
> >
> >Or do you mean you do "Complete Run" and dpkg isn't run (this bug is fixed
> >in CVS).
> >
> >It sounds like you're saying you choose "update" from the menu and no
> >upgrades are marked, which is the correct behavior; you have to then
> >choose "mark upgrades" to mark the upgrades.
>
> Run update - the package lists are updated
> Beep (I don't remember this happening in the past)
> Mark upgrades or mark smart upgrades - gnome-apt says there is nothing to
> update...
> ...so there's no point in trying a complete run.
>
> However apt-get does find things to update with dist-upgrade.
> --
> Vote against SPAM: http://www.politik-digital.de/spam/
> ========================================
> Oliver Elphick Oliver.Elphick@lfix.co.uk
> Isle of Wight http://www.lfix.co.uk/oliver
> PGP key from public servers; key ID 32B8FAA1
> ========================================
> "But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the
> night. The heavens shall pass away with a great noise,
> and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, and the
> earth and the works that are therein shall be burned
> up." II Peter 3:10
> From: Vandoorselaere Yoann <yoann@coldserver.com>
> To: apt@packages.debian.org
> Subject: Help request : apt & firewall
>
> Hi,
>
> I'm actually searching how to allow apt to pass throught a firewall,
> i'm searching how apt manage it's connection, but apparently, it isn't
> like ftp.
>
> Any feedback will be appreciated.
>
> See you
>
>
> --
> -- Yoann
> It is well known that M$ products don't call free() after a malloc().
> The Unix community wish them good luck for their future developments.
> From: Havoc Pennington <rhp@zirx.pair.com>
> To: Oliver Elphick <olly@lfix.co.uk>
> cc: Apt Packaging Team <apt@packages.debian.org>
> Subject: Re: Bug#43368: gnome-apt: gnome-apt does not mark any packages for
> upgrading
>
> On Wed, 25 Aug 1999, Oliver Elphick wrote:
> >
> > Run update - the package lists are updated
> > Beep (I don't remember this happening in the past)
>
> It's always beeped at the end of a download; I should probably take that
> out, it doesn't work out well. The idea was that it would let you know the
> download was complete...
>
> > Mark upgrades or mark smart upgrades - gnome-apt says there is nothing to
> > update...
> > ...so there's no point in trying a complete run.
> >
>
> I'll investigate this. Strange, strange. (I'm using the same function
> apt-get uses...)
>
> Havoc
>
> *************************************************
>
--
Universita' di Padova http://www.lettere.unipd.it/~joke
Facolta' di Filosofia joke@lettere.unipd.it
Pluto - linux user group joke@pluto.linux.it
Innominate AG turilli@innominate.it
Reply to: