Your message dated Wed, 13 Sep 2006 03:20:26 -0600
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line more of a local use case than a bug
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.
(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what I am
talking about this indicates a serious mail system misconfiguration
somewhere. Please contact me immediately.)
Debian bug tracking system administrator
(administrator, Debian Bugs database)
--- Begin Message ---
Package: dselect
Version: 1.10.22
I posted this to the debian-dpkg mailing list, but as there were no
answers and I now believe it's indeed a bug, I file a bug report.
---
I'm using dselect + apt-zip for three years now and have a nice
stable/unstable mix on my machine, working flawlessly. Some minutes ago,
I did an "apt-get update", and dselect doesn't accept my packages
tetex-bin 2.0.2-5 and tetex-extra 2.0.2-5 to be on hold. The important
errors seem to be: "tetex-extra conflicts with texdoctk" and "tetex-bin
provides texdoctk". The latter is definitely wrong: my *installed*
tetex-bin 2.0.2-5 does not provide texdoctk according to the installed
control info. The *available* version does, however, but as I've put
both packages on hold, dselect shouldn't look into the dependencies of
the available version, should it?
I've upgraded to the newest versions of dselect (1.0.20), dpkg (1.0.20)
and apt (0.5.24). Tell me what additional information you want me to
provide.
---
It still occurs with dselect 1.0.22 and apt 0.5.25.
Greetings,
Viktor.
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Hi,
Viktor originally asked (2004-06):
> ...packages on hold, dselect shouldn't look into the dependencies of
> the available version, should it?
It should. Ignoring bits of the Available dependency tree because an
Installed package is on hold could leave packages with apparently
unsatisfiable dependencies, instead of the more informative Conflict
Resolution Screen which includes the held packages involved.
A solution to this problem could have been to have Available and prefer
use of the local versions of the packages via epochs, pinning, ordering
in sources.list, ..., so dselect would not have even seen Debian's
versions.
and recently wrote (2006-03):
> never crossed me again...So probably this should be marked
> irreproducible and closed.
It is not so much "irreproducible" as it is unnecessary or easily
avoided, but I do agree with Viktor that it should be closed. :-)
- Bruce
--- End Message ---
