Your message dated Mon, 31 May 2004 20:12:47 -0700
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Duplicate
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)
--------------------------------------
Received: (at submit) by bugs.debian.org; 25 Aug 2002 12:58:24 +0000
>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sun Aug 25 07:58:24 2002
Return-path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Received: from c88ea.unt0.thelma.kar1.toplink-plan.net
(paola.int.toplink-plannet.de) [212.126.200.142] (NAT-c0a8d71f)
by master.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.12 1 (Debian))
id 17iwyF-0001FU-00; Sun, 25 Aug 2002 07:58:23 -0500
Received: from haber by paola.int.toplink-plannet.de with local (Exim 4.04 #1
(Debian))
id 17iwyC-00044c-00; Sun, 25 Aug 2002 14:58:20 +0200
From: Marc Haber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: Debian Bug Tracking System <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: apt: missing Label field in Release file causes apt-cache policy to
output garbage
X-Mailer: reportbug 1.50
Date: Sun, 25 Aug 2002 14:58:20 +0200
Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Package: apt
Version: 0.5.4
Severity: normal
Note: This might be a potential buffer overflow, and raise a possible
security problem since apt is usually executed as root. I don't know
enough about that stuff, so I won't make the bug a high priority bug.
See this typescript:
[4/[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ cat /etc/apt/sources.list
deb http://debian.toplink-plannet.de/debian/ woody main
[5/[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ sudo apt-get update
0% [Working]
Hit http://debian.toplink-plannet.de woody/main Packages
Hit http://debian.toplink-plannet.de woody/main Release
66% [Working]
Reading Package Lists... 0%
Reading Package Lists... Done
Building Dependency Tree... 0%
Building Dependency Tree... Done^
[6/[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ apt-cache policy
Package Files:
100 /var/lib/dpkg/status
release a=now
500 http://debian.toplink-plannet.de woody/main Packages
release v=3.0,o=Debian,a=stable,l=Debian,c=main
origin debian.toplink-plannet.de
Pinned Packages:
[7/[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$
This looks fine, when only the debian archive is used. I am currently
experiementing with my own distribution. Now let's bring my own
(wrong) Release files into the game:
[7/[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ cat /etc/apt/sources.list
deb http://debian.toplink-plannet.de/debian/ woody main
deb http://debian.toplink-plannet.de/debian/ tpl/woody main
[8/[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ sudo apt-get update
0% [Working]
Hit http://debian.toplink-plannet.de woody/main Packages
Hit http://debian.toplink-plannet.de woody/main Release
Get:1 http://debian.toplink-plannet.de tpl/woody/main Packages [5249B]
[1 Packages 3594/5249B 68%]
Get:2 http://debian.toplink-plannet.de tpl/woody/main Release [62B]
99% [Working]
99% [1 Packages gzip 0]
100% [Working]
Fetched 5311B in 0s (153kB/s)
Reading Package Lists... 0%
Reading Package Lists... Done
Building Dependency Tree... 0%
Building Dependency Tree... Done
[9/[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ apt-cache policy
Package Files:
100 /var/lib/dpkg/status
release a=now
500 http://debian.toplink-plannet.de tpl/woody/main Packages
> release o=tpl,a=woody,l=Üvþ<98>^D,c=main
origin debian.toplink-plannet.de
500 http://debian.toplink-plannet.de woody/main Packages
release v=3.0,o=Debian,a=stable,l=Debian,c=main
origin debian.toplink-plannet.de
Pinned Packages:
[10/[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$
Please notice the garbage in the l=field for tpl/woody/main, line
marked ">"
The Release file for tpl/dooy is wrong:
[10/[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ cat
/var/lib/apt/lists/debian.toplink-plannet.de_debian_dissts_tpl_woody_main_binary-i386_Release
Archive: woody
Component: main
Architecture: i386
Origin: tpl
[11/[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$
but apt-cache should notice that.
Greetings
Marc
-- System Information
Debian Release: testing/unstable
Architecture: i386
Kernel: Linux paola 2.4.19-paola #1 Wed Aug 7 08:54:32 UTC 2002 i686
Locale: LANG=C, LC_CTYPE=de_DE
Versions of packages apt depends on:
ii libc6 2.2.5-10 GNU C Library: Shared libraries an
ii libstdc++2.10-glibc2.2 1:2.95.4-11 The GNU stdc++ library
---------------------------------------
Received: (at 158117-done) by bugs.debian.org; 1 Jun 2004 03:13:18 +0000
>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Mon May 31 20:13:18 2004
Return-path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Received: from mta11.adelphia.net [68.168.78.205]
by spohr.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian))
id 1BUziI-0005z8-00; Mon, 31 May 2004 20:13:18 -0700
Received: from mizar.alcor.net ([69.167.148.207]) by mta11.adelphia.net
(InterMail vM.5.01.06.08 201-253-122-130-108-20031117) with ESMTP
id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>;
Mon, 31 May 2004 23:12:47 -0400
Received: from mdz by mizar.alcor.net with local (Exim 4.34)
id 1BUzhn-00023R-DF
for [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Mon, 31 May 2004 20:12:47 -0700
Date: Mon, 31 May 2004 20:12:47 -0700
From: Matt Zimmerman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Duplicate
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.6i
Sender: Matt Zimmerman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60-bugs.debian.org_2004_03_25
(1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on spohr.debian.org
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.5 required=4.0 tests=BAYES_10 autolearn=no
version=2.60-bugs.debian.org_2004_03_25
X-Spam-Level:
This seems to be a duplicate of #213311, which was fixed in 0.5.15.
* Patch from Koblinger Egmont <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> to fix
pkgCache::PkgFileIterator::Label() to correctly refer to File->Label
rather than File->Origin (Closes: #213311)
--
- mdz
