Bug#836899: [Aptitude-devel] Bug#836899: aptitude: dpkg - found unknown packages; this might mean the available database is outdated
in-line :-
On 07/09/2016, David Kalnischkies <david@kalnischkies.de> wrote:
> Control: reassign -1 apt 1.3~rc1
> Control: affects -1 aptitude
> Control: close -1 1.3~rc3
>
> (lets see if ^ this is going to work)
>
> On Tue, Sep 06, 2016 at 10:37:06PM +0000, shirish शिरीष wrote:
>> I was updating testing today. I got the following error while updating
>> testing today.
>
> You meant you /upgraded/ testing, right? Updating as a word is in this
> context a bit too overloaded and tends to refer just to the 'update'
> step, not any form of '(full/dist/safe-)upgrade'.
>
>
Dear David,
I am on testing with priority for testing (600) and sid/unstable or
experimental both having value of 1.
─[$] cat /etc/apt/sources.list
#### testing #########
deb http://httpredir.debian.org/debian/ testing main contrib non-free
deb-src http://httpredir.debian.org/debian testing main contrib non-free
#### unstable #########
deb http://httpredir.debian.org/debian unstable main contrib non-free
deb-src http://httpredir.debian.org/debian unstable main contrib
#### experimental #########
deb http://httpredir.debian.org/debian experimental main contrib
deb-src http://httpredir.debian.org/debian experimental main contrib
##### Debug packages #######
deb http://debug.mirrors.debian.org/debian-debug/ testing-debug main
deb http://debug.mirrors.debian.org/debian-debug/ unstable-debug main
deb http://debug.mirrors.debian.org/debian-debug/ experimental-debug main
>> dpkg: warning: package not in database at line 32: libappstream3:amd64
>> dpkg: warning: package not in database at line 34: libprotobuf9v5:amd64
>> dpkg: warning: found unknown packages; this might mean the available
>> database
>> is outdated, and needs to be updated through a frontend method
>
> You "helpfully" stripped all the context, but I guess you were
> (dist-)upgrading, you have autoremove enabled (default in aptitude) and
> purge packages on remove (not the default). Any other situation in which
> packages are purged can "work" too through, I am just guessing this
> situation as these libraries had a soname bump recently.
As shared above, no, I was not dist-upgrading but updating and
upgrading within testing only.
You are correct though in your analysis that I have both autoremove
(which is the default) and purge (which is not the default) so it's
less work for me . You are also correct that both the libraries had
soname bumps recently.
>
>> Versions of packages aptitude depends on:
>> ii aptitude-common 0.8.3-1
>> ii libapt-pkg5.0 1.3~rc2
>
> 1.3~rc3 has a fix for a problem introduced in 1.3~exp1 titled "* do not
> restore selections for already purged packages" which in all likelyhood
> is your problem as I even mentioned aptitude in the long description:
> https://anonscm.debian.org/cgit/apt/apt.git/commit/?id=70ff288b98a7aae2c2808112015d34f76f2d5114
Saw it and yes, seems to be the same.
> Feel free to ignore the warning until apt transitions to testing as it
> is perfectly harmless – no need to upgrade apt out of line to fix this.
Thank you, will wait for it to come to testing. Thank you for the
verbose reply.
>
> Best regards
>
> David Kalnischkies
>
--
Regards,
Shirish Agarwal शिरीष अग्रवाल
My quotes in this email licensed under CC 3.0
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/
http://flossexperiences.wordpress.com
EB80 462B 08E1 A0DE A73A 2C2F 9F3D C7A4 E1C4 D2D8
Reply to: