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

Bug#1008759: marked as done (apt: autopkgtest needs update for new version of dpkg: Testcase test-apt-tagfile-fields-order failed)

Your message dated Fri, 01 Apr 2022 17:18:45 +0000
with message-id <E1naKv7-0000mI-R9@fasolo.debian.org>
and subject line Bug#1008759: fixed in apt 2.4.4
has caused the Debian Bug report #1008759,
regarding apt: autopkgtest needs update for new version of dpkg: Testcase test-apt-tagfile-fields-order failed
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.)


-- 
1008759: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1008759
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact owner@bugs.debian.org with problems
--- Begin Message --- 
Source: apt
Version: 2.4.3
Severity: serious
X-Debbugs-CC: dpkg@packages.debian.org
Tags: sid bookworm
User: debian-ci@lists.debian.org
Usertags: needs-update
Control: affects -1 src:dpkg

Dear maintainer(s),
With a recent upload of dpkg the autopkgtest of apt fails in testing when that autopkgtest is run with the binary packages of dpkg from unstable. It passes when run with only packages from testing. In tabular form: 

                       pass            fail
dpkg                   from testing    1.21.6
apt                    from testing    2.4.3
all others             from testing    from testing

I copied some of the output at the bottom of this report.
Currently this regression is blocking the migration of dpkg to testing [1]. Of course, dpkg shouldn't just break your autopkgtest (or even worse, your package), but it seems to me that the change in dpkg was intended and your package needs to update to the new situation.
If this is a real problem in your package (and not only in your autopkgtest), the right binary package(s) from dpkg should really add a versioned Breaks on the unfixed version of (one of your) package(s). Note: the Breaks is nice even if the issue is only in the autopkgtest as it helps the migration software to figure out the right versions to combine in the tests. 

More information about this bug and the reason for filing it can be found on
https://wiki.debian.org/ContinuousIntegration/RegressionEmailInformation

Paul

[1] https://qa.debian.org/excuses.php?package=dpkg

https://ci.debian.net/data/autopkgtest/testing/amd64/a/apt/20465752/log.gz

(68/287) Testcase test-apt-tagfile-fields-order: -Class
-Conffiles
-Config-Version
-MSDOS-Filename
-Optional
-Original-Maintainer
-Package-Revision
-Package_Revision
-Recommended
-Revision
-SHA512
-Status
+Static-Built-Using
-Triggers-Awaited
-Triggers-Pending
FAIL
Check that apt knows all fields dpkg orders in Packages … FAIL
-Class
-Filename
-MD5sum
-MSDOS-Filename
-Optional
-Original-Maintainer
-Package-Revision
-Package_Revision
-Recommended
-Revision
-SHA1
-SHA256
-SHA512
-Size
+Static-Built-Using
Check that apt knows all fields dpkg orders in status … -Class
-Conffiles
-Config-Version
-Filename
-MD5sum
-MSDOS-Filename
-Optional
-Original-Maintainer
-Package-Revision
-Package_Revision
-Recommended
-Revision
-SHA1
-SHA256
-SHA512
-Size
-Status
+Static-Built-Using
-Triggers-Awaited
-Triggers-Pending
Check that apt knows all fields dpkg orders in DEBIAN/control … FAIL
 P P
Running test-apt-tagfile-fields-order -> FAILED

Attachment: OpenPGP_signature
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message --- 
Source: apt
Source-Version: 2.4.4
Done: Julian Andres Klode <jak@debian.org>

We believe that the bug you reported is fixed in the latest version of
apt, which is due to be installed in the Debian FTP archive.

A summary of the changes between this version and the previous one is
attached.

Thank you for reporting the bug, which will now be closed.  If you
have further comments please address them to 1008759@bugs.debian.org,
and the maintainer will reopen the bug report if appropriate.

Debian distribution maintenance software
pp.
Julian Andres Klode <jak@debian.org> (supplier of updated apt package)

(This message was generated automatically at their request; if you
believe that there is a problem with it please contact the archive
administrators by mailing ftpmaster@ftp-master.debian.org)


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA512

Format: 1.8
Date: Fri, 01 Apr 2022 18:47:31 +0200
Source: apt
Architecture: source
Version: 2.4.4
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: medium
Maintainer: APT Development Team <deity@lists.debian.org>
Changed-By: Julian Andres Klode <jak@debian.org>
Closes: 1008759
Changes:
 apt (2.4.4) unstable; urgency=medium
 .
   [ David Kalnischkies ]
   * Recognize Static-Built-Using and order it below Built-Using
     (Closes: #1008759)
Checksums-Sha1:
 5b175910cac74d79c268a666a9f5bd45a7a5bac5 2797 apt_2.4.4.dsc
 f32601a3a20ba326eaba6f0a6b8b76e83c07ea88 2216316 apt_2.4.4.tar.xz
 c330446b66cc0ef537199343c4da8bd5b744bc68 7527 apt_2.4.4_source.buildinfo
Checksums-Sha256:
 f90d16364e9e8aa49ba5523018dceb2f63b66d9bbdd9c0f1a63a337b7ff4156e 2797 apt_2.4.4.dsc
 d6d83d122ddd7cc83b2c2f839a55940c13ab93e5cf6024a010d6a6b4110dcf0e 2216316 apt_2.4.4.tar.xz
 145f24fdc1c15e8b511f7e2ed8d1ac00e2e15d32442f8ae3a757d6de2bf5974e 7527 apt_2.4.4_source.buildinfo
Files:
 dd70b9f13daaec61f32a72187ad9e2cb 2797 admin important apt_2.4.4.dsc
 8120dd585594bf8b26f0d01bc5f621b5 2216316 admin important apt_2.4.4.tar.xz
 363dc294617e9467a70a5740c2fe7a2f 7527 admin important apt_2.4.4_source.buildinfo

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
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=syis
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--- End Message ---
Reply to: