On Sun, Apr 03, 2011 at 03:16:33PM +0200, Raphael Hertzog wrote: > Hi, > > On Sun, 03 Apr 2011, Craig Sanders wrote: > > 1. it segfaulted! (fortunately, /var/lib/dpkg/status wasn't corrupted) > > > > 2. it claimed it was installing a package called 'x)' which does > > not exist. probably related to #1 above (buffer overrun or similar, > > perhaps?) > > > > (in case those 8-bit chars get mangled by an MTA, that's '788C 9729' > > in hex) > > Both problems are related. And I just pushed a fix for this.
cool, thanks. > > 3. version numbers which have been valid for years are now being > > complained about as if they are invalid. > > That's not a mistake. Version numbers are supposed to start with a digit. > > dpkg still accepts them for installed packages but forbids them in .deb. ah, okay. i've been making kernel packages with version numbering like that for years with make-kpkg (which complains about hyphens in the --revision arg, but not about the version starting with a letter). i'll start making them as version.hostname rather than hostname.version. any chance of dpkg being less spammy about it? i guess some kind of notification is required but it's not a major problem, so doesn't need a couple of lines of output per package. perhaps a single summary line mentioning the problem and listing the packages comma separated. craig -- craig sanders <c...@taz.net.au> -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-dpkg-bugs-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
