On Thu, Dec 13, 2007 at 01:49:07PM -0500, Joey Hess [EMAIL PROTECTED] was
heard to say:
bts tag 233129 d-i
Hm, that's an interesting one. It looks like the apt fetcher claims
that the update succeeded even when some sources failed, so I have to
iterate the list of download items after the
On Sat, Dec 15, 2007 at 09:42:58AM -0800, Daniel Burrows wrote:
On Thu, Dec 13, 2007 at 01:49:07PM -0500, Joey Hess [EMAIL PROTECTED] was
heard to say:
bts tag 233129 d-i
Hm, that's an interesting one. It looks like the apt fetcher claims
that the update succeeded even when some
Andrew Sackville-West wrote:
On Thu, Dec 13, 2007 at 02:24:15AM +, Nick Boyce wrote:
(Etch) aptitude's error handling [cough] falls short of optimum
behaviour. In particular it returns an exit status of zero in various
failure situations
[...]
I did a quick test with 'apt-get' on Sarge,
Daniel Burrows wrote:
On Thu, Dec 13, 2007 at 02:24:15AM +, Nick Boyce [EMAIL PROTECTED] was
heard to say:
Does anyone think another bug report is called for ?
It looks as though it's known that the error handling behaviour
needs attention but it's not high on anybody's TODO list.
On Thu, Dec 13, 2007 at 01:57:55PM +, Nick Boyce [EMAIL PROTECTED] was
heard to say:
Daniel Burrows wrote:
... If you want this in a hurry your best bet is to either
send a working patch to a bug report or (if such a patch
already exists) to harass me via email until I apply it. :-)
bts tag 233129 d-i
thanks
Daniel Burrows wrote:
I'm currently busy working on other parts of the program. If you want
this in a hurry your best bet is to either send a working patch to a bug
report or (if such a patch already exists) to harass me via email until
I apply it. :-) Preferably
On Thu, Dec 13, 2007 at 01:56:53PM +, Nick Boyce wrote:
Andrew Sackville-West wrote:
On Thu, Dec 13, 2007 at 02:24:15AM +, Nick Boyce wrote:
(Etch) aptitude's error handling [cough] falls short of optimum
behaviour. In particular it returns an exit status of zero in various
In the course of scripting some aptitude upgrade activity I've found
that (Etch) aptitude's error handling [cough] falls short of optimum
behaviour. In particular it returns an exit status of zero in various
failure situations, which is unhelpful, to say the least.
For example:
Although it
On Thu, Dec 13, 2007 at 02:24:15AM +, Nick Boyce wrote:
In the course of scripting some aptitude upgrade activity I've found
that (Etch) aptitude's error handling [cough] falls short of optimum
behaviour. In particular it returns an exit status of zero in various
failure situations, which
On Thu, Dec 13, 2007 at 02:24:15AM +, Nick Boyce [EMAIL PROTECTED] was
heard to say:
Does anyone think another bug report is called for ?
It looks as though it's known that the error handling behaviour
needs attention but it's not high on anybody's TODO list.
I'm currently busy working
10 matches
Mail list logo
