Control: reassign -1 aptitude Control: retitle -1 aptitude can put the package system in a broken state with different versions of a MultiArch package Control: severity -1 serious
On 2016-11-22 09:10:01 +0000, Luca Boccassi wrote: > On Tue, 2016-11-22 at 04:27 +0100, Vincent Lefevre wrote: > > On 2016-11-22 00:37:14 +0000, Luca Boccassi wrote: > > > In the end, you shouldn't have let aptitude remove the packages. It can > > > happen from time to time on unstable to have temporary inconsistent > > > state in the apt tree (that's why it's called unstable), for example in > > > this case it was probably because the new amd64 version was up in the > > > repo but the i386 was still being built/published. > > > > The problem here is that aptitude said that the packages were > > no longer used, i.e. there were no dependencies on them. This > > is very misleading. > > I have no control over what text aptitude outputs, I suggest contacting > the aptitude maintainers if you have a suggestion regarding that. > > > Still, there are missing Breaks. > > No, there are not. So, this is a bug in aptitude. In any case, if the dependencies are correct, the package system should never be put in a broken state. -- Vincent Lefèvre <[email protected]> - 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) _______________________________________________ Aptitude-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/aptitude-devel
