Bug#498799: +1, any chance for Lenny?

[Michael Vogt <mvo@debian.org>]

On Wed, Oct 01, 2008 at 09:39:04AM +0200, Ferenc Wagner wrote:
> Christian Perrier <bubulle@debian.org> writes:
> 
> > Quoting Ferenc Wagner (wferi@niif.hu):
> >> (Either you didn't Cc: me or the message got lost; it's a pity: we
> >> pretty much wasted a week...)
> >
> > As far as I have seen, noone follwoed up to your mail.
> 
> Oh no, Michael Vogt did, it's in the BTS.  It's just I didn't get a
> personal notification, so it went unnoticed for quite some time.

Thanks for the patch, while it certainly fixes the problem I think its
not ideal because it adds a check into the generic layer of libapt
against a "APT::Get" config item (that is the namespace of apt-get).

I attached a alternative solution that move the state file writing
into dpkgpm.cc instead. Its is a problem for packages that
reimplement pkgDPkgPM::Go() (I doubt that anyone is doing that).

> > Sad, but that's how APT maintenance is done right now.
> 
> Is there any particular reason for that?  APT is installed on every
> single Debian system...  Is it the responsibility?  Or rather the
> complexity?  Just curious.

This is currently discussed in another thread. I have no good answer,
but I think "not enough time" is a important issue. Help is certainly
welcome.

Cheers,
 Michael