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

Bug#768473: marked as done (apt: dist-upgrade: install new DPKG earlier)

Your message dated Sat, 8 Nov 2014 00:43:14 +0100
with message-id <20141107234314.GD21411@crossbow>
and subject line Re: Bug#768473: apt: dist-upgrade: install new DPKG earlier
has caused the Debian Bug report #768473,
regarding apt: dist-upgrade: install new DPKG earlier
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 this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact owner@bugs.debian.org
immediately.)


-- 
768473: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=768473
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact owner@bugs.debian.org with problems
--- Begin Message --- 
Package: apt
Version: 0.9.7.9+deb7u6
Severity: normal

This issue was found when upgrading a host from Wheezy to Jessie using the following recipe on 2014-11-07 just after the freeze started:

sudo apt-get update && sudo apt-get --purge dist-upgrade && sudo apt-get --purge autoremove $(deborphan --guess-all)

When running 'apt-get dist-upgrade' newer DPKG versions should get unpacked and configured much earlier, preferably right after all of its Pre-Depends and Depends have been updated. This would be desirable to ensure that packages which utilize recent 'dpkg-maintscript-helper' features do not fail at manipulating configuration files.

-- System Information:
Debian Release: 7.7
  APT prefers testing
  APT policy: (1001, 'testing'), (1001, 'oldstable'), (101, 'stable')
Architecture: i386 (i686)

Kernel: Linux 3.2.0-4-686-pae (SMP w/2 CPU cores)
Locale: LANG=fi_FI.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=fi_FI.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8)
Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/dash

Versions of packages apt depends on:
ii  debian-archive-keyring  2014.1~deb7u1
ii  gnupg                   1.4.12-7+deb7u6
ii  libapt-pkg4.12          0.9.7.9+deb7u6
ii  libc6                   2.19-12
ii  libgcc1                 1:4.9.1-19
ii  libstdc++6              4.9.1-19

apt recommends no packages.

Versions of packages apt suggests:
pn  apt-doc     <none>
ii  aptitude    0.6.8.2-1
ii  dpkg-dev    1.16.15
ii  python-apt  0.8.8.2
ii  xz-utils    5.1.1alpha+20120614-2

-- no debconf information

--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message --- 
On Fri, Nov 07, 2014 at 06:19:45PM +0200, Martin-Éric Racine wrote:
> This issue was found when upgrading a host from Wheezy to Jessie using the following recipe on 2014-11-07 just after the freeze started:
> 
> sudo apt-get update && sudo apt-get --purge dist-upgrade && sudo apt-get --purge autoremove $(deborphan --guess-all)
> 
> When running 'apt-get dist-upgrade' newer DPKG versions should get unpacked and configured much earlier, preferably right after all of its Pre-Depends and Depends have been updated.

dpkg is essential and as such it gets the immediate configuration flag,
which beside causing a "configure as soon as possible after unpack" but
also a "unpack as soon as possible". dpkg isn't further specialized, but
the amount of essential packages is pretty low, so there isn't really
a need to.

(and in the end, other essential tools like coreutils are just as
important for maintainer scripts, so who would be the first among them)

The problem is just that "as soon as possible" can be very late as not
only positive dependencies like Depends, which dpkg hasn't much, have to
be satisfied but also negative ones like Conflicts/Breaks, which itself
usually mean upgrading other packages before we can touch dpkg.

I like to tell the story that dpkg used to "depend" in this way on KDE
in squeeze (this was worked around days before release for other reasons).


> This would be desirable to ensure that packages which utilize recent 'dpkg-maintscript-helper' features do not fail at manipulating configuration files.

If that happens please report bugs against these packages as they have
to declare their dependencies properly. Trying to avoid these issues by
upgrading dpkg earlier is just trying to paper over this, but that can
only be done to a certain extend; in other words: It will fail. Hard.
It also means that backport-people will stumble over this in a bad way.

In fact, the reason that we give essential packages such a special
treatment is not to have them upgraded early for the benefit of what
comes later on, but to get the important stuff done before the other
stuff can fail and hence either prevent or interrupt the upgrade…


So, as we already do the best we can do here, I am closing the
bugreport as "we already do that".


Best regards

David Kalnischkies

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature


--- End Message ---
Reply to: