Control: retitle -1 apt-listbugs: gets confused about version tracking when versions for other packages are present Control: found -1 apt-listbugs/0.1.8
On Thu, 15 Nov 2012 09:06:53 +0100 Vincent Lefevre wrote:
[...]
> I wanted to upgrade coreutils from 8.13-3.3 to 8.20-1, and
> apt-listbugs didn't show any bug, but the upgrade failed:
[...]
Hello Vincent,
thanks for your bug report.
> This is reproducible, though reportbug shows:
>
> Bugs with severity serious
> 1) #687906 [powerpc] coreutils: fails to build from source (test-futimens
Bug #687906 is assigned to the coreutils *source* package and
apt-listbugs currently ignores those bugs (see #257873).
> 2) #693211 coreutils: file conflict with realpath
Bug #693211 should have been taken into account, but it has not!
As far as I can tell, the problem is caused by the fact that the serious
bug #693211 is (correctly) assigned to both package realpath and
package coreutils.
And it is marked as found in versions realpath/1.17, coreutils/8.20-1.
Since apt-listbugs is not yet able to figure out which source package
name corresponds to a given binary package name, when it reads that
bug #693211 is found in realpath/1.17, it just drops the "realpath/"
string (as it *could* be the source package name, even though it's not,
in the present case!) and understands that the bug is found in
versions 1.17 and 8.20-1.
As a consequence, when evaluating the coreutils 8.13-3.3 -> 8.20-1
upgrade, apt-listbugs incorrectly assumes that bug #693211 is already
present in your system (the currently installed version 8.13-3.3 is
later than version 1.17 !) and therefore incorrectly thinks that
stopping the upgrade is pointless.
In case you are interested to verify this, please try
$ apt-listbugs list coreutils/8.13-3.3 --debug
and also take a look at line 847 of
/usr/share/apt-listbugs/apt-listbugs/logic.rb
I think that this issue can only be fixed once I implement a way
to figure out the source package name of a given binary package
(as you sure know, these two names are not necessarily identical).
See also the already mentioned bug #257873 for a related (and still
unsolved, unfortunately) issue.
I will try and see whether this issue may be fixed without a major
overhaul of the code...
Anyway, please take into account that I am currently having a bunch of
personal issues: do not count on a very fast resolution. Sorry. :-(
Note to self: maybe the source package name can be found in the
SOAP returned bug_status ("source" key). I need to investigate
further...
--
http://www.inventati.org/frx/frx-gpg-key-transition-2010.txt
New GnuPG key, see the transition document!
..................................................... Francesco Poli .
GnuPG key fpr == CA01 1147 9CD2 EFDF FB82 3925 3E1C 27E1 1F69 BFFE
pgpOBPRfjS7Vu.pgp
Description: PGP signature
