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


On Fri, 22 Nov 2002, Adam Heath wrote:

> Well, on this note, the version stuff is no longer a problem.  I ported the
> dpkg version to apt, and did an upgrade of 180 megs.  Seemed to run fine.


Well, lets look at the diffs..

The verison compare switch is a bit sloppy, the style is wrong, the
comments were not updated and some dead code was not removed. I've fixed
it up.

The timegm thing, C++ fixes and i18n stuff looks just fine. The change in
the signature for the Configure::Dump function does require a soname bump,
I belive that has already been done for other reasons, but double check
when you make the .deb..

This seems to be a bad change:
-      {'n',"all-names","APT::Cache::AllNames",0},
+      {0,"all-names","APT::Cache::AllNames",0},

The bug is asking for -n to == --names-only, not --all-names. I'd use
something different than -n personally, -n is generally no-action.

Significant changes to the output of apt-get does require a documentation
update. The howto contains some 'screen dump' snippits which are surely
out of date now.

The change to the RSH method lacks a range check, too many args will smash
the stack.

> As for translated package descriptions, are those that have done work there
> listening?  Could you speak up, and show how you have modified apt?

There was recently a large batch that I sent to the deity list..
> Where can I find more info about the Release file changes?

Couple people have been working on a patch, I'd save that for another

Have you dropped something in experimental yet?


Reply to: