Bug#948892: apt does not store .deb files in /var/cache/apt/archives
On 2020-01-14 15:10:18 +0100, Julian Andres Klode wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 14, 2020 at 02:59:25PM +0100, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
> > Package: apt
> > Version: 1.8.4
> > Severity: normal
> >
> > I've installed some packages with "apt install ...", but the
> > corresponding .deb files are missing from the /var/cache/apt/archives
> > directory (contrary to packages installed via aptitude).
> >
> > This is either a bug or an undocumented behavior (both in the
> > man pages and in /usr/share/doc/apt-doc/guide.text.gz). I also
> > cannot see the reason of such a behavior: .deb packages are
> > useful if one needs to revert to the previous version of a
> > package.
>
> It's a feature since 1.2 (see debian/NEWS).
I see (that's rather old, and I missed that, probably at some time
I was not using the apt command at all).
> If you installed the package, you don't need it anymore, and
> it's not going to help you revert to an older version, because
> it's the same version you just installed. Keeping it is
> useless.
You miss the point that with the next upgrade of the package,
it will no longer be the same version as the installed one.
If for some reason the next version is broken (which happens
from time to time), one may want to revert to the old version,
and the only way is via the .deb file.
> Compare that to autoclean which deletes precisely the
> versions you'd be interested in keeping (the ones no
> longer downloadable).
That's why I don't use autoclean (but at least, autoclean usually
keeps the installed version).
But in unstable, since the new version replaces the old one, the
previous .deb file is no longer available for download, unless it
happens to be the version in testing or stable.
> A more sensible approach for people who do want revert abilities,
> would be to keep $N versions of each deb in the archive, where
> $N might be 3.
Yes.
> > Perhaps that's the default option
> >
> > Binary::apt::APT::Keep-Downloaded-Packages "0";
> >
> > below, but it is not documented.
>
> I don't see why it needs documentation, apart from
> the change in default being announced.
*All* configuration options need to be documented somewhere,
and man pages, if not containing the full documentation, should
at least give a reference to the full documentation. Announces
are useful, but do not constitute documentation.
--
Vincent Lefèvre <vincent@vinc17.net> - Web: <https://www.vinc17.net/>
100% accessible validated (X)HTML - Blog: <https://www.vinc17.net/blog/>
Work: CR INRIA - computer arithmetic / AriC project (LIP, ENS-Lyon)
Reply to: