On Sun, Mar 24, 2013 at 18:17:46 +0100, David Kalnischkies wrote: > Pictures^Wdpkg-status files or it didn't happen, as I said multiple times now. > Yeah I know I'll try to get that. > The problem is that there is no "this bug" as this message is kinda catch-all, > so its extremely likely that different bugs in APT (and in dependency chains) > result in the very same message. Even more so if the message is completely > different (and yes, a different package makes it completely different). > > There is no workaround beside the config option the message mentions > and there is also no such thing as a fix we could backport. > > I also want to mention that there wasn't a lot of change in this code between > lenny and squeeze - beside some cornercases, debug enhancements and > *drum roll* changing the string of the message to the current form from > "Internal error, could not immediate configure %s". > So I wonder a bit what changed in how we write down dependencies after > lenny vs. after squeeze as this wasn't such a popular error condition before … > (I especially wonder how all these packages manage to become pseudo-essential) > My impression is that the breaks among toolchain packages brought to us by multiarch are causing trouble here... > I am already scared what will creep up for jessie, now that we had a lot of > code changes in that area in apt/wheezy. It will be so much fun … not. > So it would be interesting to know about which versions we are talking here. > The original bugreport e.g. is against an early post-squeeze APT version, > so are other instances now against apt/squeeze or against apt/wheezy or > some version in-between? > Pretty sure mine was with apt/squeeze. But again, I'll try to get you the status file. Cheers, Julien
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature