On Sat, Mar 16, 2013 at 11:25:18PM +0100, Francesco Poli wrote: > On Sat, 16 Mar 2013 16:04:38 +0100 Serafeim Zanikolas wrote: > > [...] > > I'm not sure any more that using a fifo instead of stdin is > > needed for a "programmatic" frontend. After all, the tracebacks in #662983 > > suggest that the failure occurs only when apt-listbugs tries to access > > /dev/tty, at which point it has already parsed the apt hook data from stdin. > > It seems to me that you are right: if I recall correctly, the failure > indeed happens after the hook info parsing step.
Do you agree then that adding the fifo feature to apt and adapting apt-listbugs accordingly is not needed nor does it suffice for fixing #662983? > Anyway, implementing a new alternative frontend is an even more radical > modification for apt-listbugs. Let's not forget that here we were only > talking about fixing #671726 and #671728 (in order to fix #662983 in a > better way)... #662983, ie. relying on tty input, is not fixed by switching to a fifo: I've reproduced the issue with fifo-based apt & apt-listbugs. I see no other way than a non-interactive frontend (but this is a discussion we shouldn't have on an apt bug report). -- Every great idea is worthless without someone to do the work. --Neil Williams -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
