Package: debootstrap
Version: 0.3.1.4
Severity: important

The following commands currently produce errors.

# debootstrap --arch m68k --download-only sarge test/ 
http://ftp.nl.debian.org/debian
I: Retrieving Release
I: Retrieving Packages
I: Validating Packages
I: Checking component main on http://ftp.nl.debian.org/debian...
E: Couldn't find these debs: 30535242

# debootstrap --arch amd64 --download-only sarge test/ 
http://ftp.nl.debian.org/debian-amd64/debian
I: Retrieving Release
I: Retrieving Packages
I: Validating Packages
I: Checking component main on http://ftp.nl.debian.org/debian-amd64/debian...
E: Couldn't find these debs: 33024830

There are two problems:
- the definitions for these arches produce a package list in which some
  packages are included more than once
- the function 'download_release' does not handle that situation very nicely,
  resulting in the weird error (reports a size instead of package name)

The errors can be solved with the following patch:
--- sarge       2005-07-24 20:35:05.497984337 +0200
+++ sarge.new   2005-07-24 20:29:17.630895732 +0200
@@ -40,7 +40,6 @@
             ;;
         "m68k")
             required="$required libreadline4"
-            required="$required libreadline4"
             base="$base atari-bootstrap atari-fdisk amiga-fdisk eject 
mac-fdisk pmac-fdisk-cross vmelilo"
            IPFWTOOL="ipchains"
             ;;
@@ -81,7 +80,7 @@
            required="$(without_package "libstdc++2.10-glibc2.2" "$required")"
            ;;
         "amd64")
-            required="$required libtext-iconv-perl zlib1g"
+            #required="$required libtext-iconv-perl zlib1g"
             base="$base pciutils psmisc"
            IPFWTOOL="iptables"
             ;;


The first case for m68k is obvious; for amd64 both "libtext-iconv-perl" and
"zlib1g" are already present in $base.

A better, more structural solution would of course be to make
'download_release' handle doubles in the list of packages (sort and uniq?).

Attachment: pgpHHBpkrGJMm.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply via email to