Bug#639964: apt: regression from 0.8.15.5: sources with no component give error processing Release file
On Thu, Sep 01, 2011 at 01:16:41AM -0400, Matthew Gabeler-Lee wrote:
> Package: apt
> Version: 0.8.15.6
> Severity: important
>
> As of apt 0.8.15.6, sources.list entries that use the "deb http://... path/"
> format instead of the "deb http://... release component" format fail (for
> me).
>
> For example, I have the following entries in my sources.list:
>
> deb-src http://iguanaworks.net/downloads/debian source/
> deb http://iguanaworks.net/downloads/debian binary-amd64/
>
> With apt 0.8.15.5, apt-get update reports no errors. With apt 0.8.15.6, I
> get these errors:
>
> W: Failed to fetch http://iguanaworks.net/downloads/debian/source/Release
> Unable to find expected entry 'Sources' in Release file (Wrong sources.list
> entry or malformed file)
>
> W: Failed to fetch
> http://iguanaworks.net/downloads/debian/binary-amd64/Release Unable to find
> expected entry 'Packages' in Release file (Wrong sources.list entry or
> malformed file)
>
> The latter Release file currently looks like this:
>
> Archive: karmic
> Component: contrib
> Origin: IguanaWorks
> Label: IguanaWorks Debian/Ubuntu Repository
> Architecture: amd64
>
> Which is the same set of keys that the ftp.us.debian.org Release file(s)
> have AFAICT.
Yes, but in addition to that, the official archive has hashes. And this
is the difference. APT expects to find the index files it shall fetch
mentioned in the Release file. Using apt-ftparchive to generate a
Release files with hashes for the repository fixes the problem.
An alternative would be for APT to not try to find hashsums for indexes
if there are no hashes in the release at all. Whether it makes sense to
support such Release files is another question.
>
> >From searching around, I'm wondering if this may be related to an older
> (fixed) bug: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=622250
No.
--
Julian Andres Klode - Debian Developer, Ubuntu Member
See http://wiki.debian.org/JulianAndresKlode and http://jak-linux.org/.
Reply to: