Re,
On Wed, 9 Dec 2009, Patrick Matthäi wrote:
Am 09.12.2009 17:11, schrieb Thomas Liske:
Hi,
Patrick Matthäi wrote:
On Wed, Dec 09, 2009 at 03:50:02PM +0100, Patrick Matthäi wrote:
could you send me the files of one host from
~/.cache/apt-dater/stats/<hostname>* please.
I'll send you two. "osama:22.stat" is from a box running unstable,
which shows up as "up to date" wrongly, while "dungheap:22.stat" is
from a machine running lenny which shows up as "unknown".
>
Your osama problem might be a bit more difficult. I will test it later.
But for dungheap you do not have the right apt-dater-host version or
better said, noone that is known by me:
STATUS: apt-dater-host|0.8.0-3coretec1|x
there is something curious. I'd feeded your stats files into apt-dater
(SVN Head build) on my Lenny host and the hosts showed up as "Updates
pending". The Debian package is still in sync w/ SVN HEAD IMHO -
Patrick, might it be a packaging problem ;) ?
Hm fuck.
I have backported installed the testing version on our update server and I
have got the same symptoms, also if the apt-dater-host package is in sync
with the apt-dater version.
One host should have got updates and the other ones should be up to date.
Now 4 hosts are in up to date (also the one with updates) and all the other
ones are going into unknown.
Also curious:
if I close now apt-dater and reopen it, _every_ host is again in unknown
OK I think I've tracked it down. There was a damn spare "!" on an if
condition which brakes the hole parcing stuff. There was a changed on the
error handling between ADPROTO 0.3 and 0.5 - the old version is handled as
UNKNOWN, the recent version is handled as UPTODATE.
Upstream has been fixed w/ r432, please try out.
Cheers,
Thomas
