Yes, correct, I no longer see the issue in mantic.
** Changed in: modemmanager (Ubuntu)
Status: Confirmed => Fix Released
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to modemmanager in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.n
trusty and xenial receive bug updates via Pro and not via the main
archive anymore, you'll have to get SEG to add bug tasks for Pro and
prepare +esm updates with them.
** Changed in: e2fsprogs (Ubuntu Trusty)
Status: In Progress => Won't Fix
** Changed in: e2fsprogs (Ubuntu Xenial)
@mruffel did you mean to get sponsoring for the patches? you might then
want to subscribe ~ubuntu-sponsors so this can be merged by the patch
pilots.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to e2fsprogs in Ubuntu.
https:/
jammy and focal packages uploaded to the archive for SRU
jammy, focal, and bionic also uploaded to
https://launchpad.net/~deity/+archive/ubuntu/apt/+packages
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to apt in Ubuntu.
htt
** Changed in: apt (Ubuntu Jammy)
Status: Confirmed => In Progress
** Changed in: apt (Ubuntu Focal)
Status: Confirmed => In Progress
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to apt in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.l
** Description changed:
[Impact]
The snapshot service provides users access to older states of the archive
with ease of use, and enables a consistent user experience across all supported
releases, as otherwise users would have to rewrite their sources.list to make
use of snapshots and set u
@Krister If you are interested in driving the process to get the patch
landed, you can follow the procedure at
https://packaging.ubuntu.com/html/fixing-a-bug.html
And
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/StableReleaseUpdates
To prepare updates for all releases. Feel free to ask for help on IRC.
If not, no
It's fine, it's pretty non-obvious that the two differ in some behaviors
and even more so that it's intentional.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to apt in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2038490
Title:
** Tags removed: rls-mm-incoming
** Changed in: systemd (Ubuntu)
Importance: High => Medium
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to systemd in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2036968
Title:
Mantic minimi
This is a feature; not a bug. apt-get is a legacy scripting interface
which tries to remain compatible with existing scripts as much as
possible, hence when we enabled installing new packages as a third mode
for upgrading, we only enabled it by default for apt upgrade whereas
apt-get upgrade would
** Description changed:
[Impact]
- The snapshot service provides users access to older states of the archive
with ease of use, and enables a consistent user experience across all supported
releases, as otherwise users would have to rewrite their sources.list to make
use of snapshots and set u
Public bug reported:
[Impact]
The snapshot service provides users access to older states of the archive with
ease of use, and enables a consistent user experience across all supported
releases, as otherwise users would have to rewrite their sources.list to make
use of snapshots and set up pinni
Well the bug remains nonetheless, just the importance gets lower
** Changed in: software-properties (Ubuntu Mantic)
Importance: High => Low
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to software-properties in
Ubuntu.
htt
Note that as we move towards deb822 everywhere there will be less issues
of that sort, as the deb822 backend recognizes every option (even
unknown ones) and software-properties allows you to edit all of them.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch seeded pa
This has been fixed a couple of months ago for PPAs and I think other
shortcuts; they now use deb822 .sources files with Signed-By parameter.
** Changed in: software-properties (Ubuntu)
Status: Confirmed => Fix Released
** Changed in: python-apt (Ubuntu)
Status: Confirmed => Fix Rel
** Changed in: apport (Ubuntu)
Status: New => Invalid
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to apport in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2036440
Title:
Choosing "Try Ubuntu" on daily-legacy image produ
** Tags removed: rls-mm-incoming
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to software-properties in
Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2037210
Title:
unable to add PPA by its sources.list line
Status in Software P
** Tags removed: rls-mm-incoming
** Tags added: foundations-todo
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to initramfs-tools in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2037202
Title:
Mantic/23.10: PXE boot tries to init
** Tags removed: rls-mm-incoming
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to ubuntu-meta in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2037425
Title:
ubuntu-server pulls in ZFS userspace
Status in ubuntu-meta package in U
Unfortunately as far as trusty is concerned, it uses the legacy cron job
and not the new systemd timers which spread the load over 24h, so it
only is able to randomize over 30 minutes starting from the cron.daily
run time (6am IIRC, probably UTC as everyone runs servers in UTC).
I don't think anyo
Yes so esm archive is contacted whenever main archive is, as the service
is started by a hook to apt update to run an apt update on a subcache.
And APT daily only runs once on a given calendar day, even if you
configure lower intervals.
So this seems to me like misconfiguration of those systems a
For 23.10, we will support deb822 sources for third party sources,
especially PPAs, but due to complex interactions did not fully manage to
create a decent experience for ubuntu.sources so far..
So in my local git branches:
The bits I got working correctly still ended up splitting paragraphs
into
** Tags removed: rls-mm-incoming
** Tags added: foundations-todo
** Also affects: software-properties (Ubuntu Mantic)
Importance: Undecided
Status: Confirmed
** Also affects: ppa-purge (Ubuntu Mantic)
Importance: High
Status: Triaged
--
You received this bug notification bec
** Changed in: ubuntu-meta (Ubuntu Lunar)
Status: New => Won't Fix
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to ubuntu-meta in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2033440
Title:
ubuntu-desktop: unnecessary har
** Tags removed: rls-mm-incoming
** Tags added: foundations-todo
** Also affects: whoopsie (Ubuntu Mantic)
Importance: High
Status: New
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to whoopsie in Ubuntu.
https://bug
** Also affects: debug-me (Debian) via
https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1052313
Importance: Unknown
Status: Unknown
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to binutils in Ubuntu.
https://bugs
Just continue appending packages that APT would install until it stops
trying to install new stuff.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to apt in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1968154
Title:
Only keep 2 k
Adding a task for sodtware-properties as I think this may be easier to
implement there than fix the script, and because we also generally are
going to need an owner such that the incoming tag does something - ppa-
purge is a pretty hacky universe script
--
You received this bug notification becau
ppa-purge is a pretty dangerous script to run due to the downgrade
functionality that we should be discouraging use of.
It can create systems that look like they have supported components only
but had everything messed up by downgrading from some PPA.
If the PPA added packages not available in ot
Packages need to declare the appropriate Replaces and Breaks (or
Conflicts if no later version of the package previously shipping the
file exists)
** Package changed: apt (Ubuntu) => apparmor (Ubuntu)
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch seeded packages,
A shorter version that avoids the preferences file is:
sudo apt update && sudo apt install --no-remove '?installed?source-
package(^systemd$)/jammy-updates'
Unless something else depends on a newer systemd in which case both
don't work, but essentially this should.
--
You received this bug noti
Dropping the rls-ff-incoming in favor of adding a task (and one for
jammy) so it is out of view until nn cycle.
** Tags removed: rls-mm-incoming
** Tags added: rls-nn-incoming
** Also affects: unattended-upgrades (Ubuntu Jammy)
Importance: Undecided
Status: New
** Also affects: unatten
** Tags removed: rls-mm-incoming
** Tags added: foundations-todo
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to software-properties in
Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2033949
Title:
Does not work with sources in de
@bmaupin You'll want to use `apt list` to actually then also see in the
output if they are all automatically installed, but if they all are feel
free to open a new bug, there's not much point putting that in this one.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch
I think this is still Fix Released, the cups deb is back in main, hplip
has been force demoted to make everything sort of work (well no hp
drivers but that's tracked elsewhere).
** Changed in: ubuntu-meta (Ubuntu)
Status: In Progress => Fix Released
** Tags removed: rls-mm-incoming
--
Yo
** Tags removed: rls-mm-incoming
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to systemd in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2030788
Title:
Usability: "localectl set-x11-keymap" doesn't work in mantic
Status in clou
This depends on bug 2028054
** Tags removed: rls-mm-incoming
** Changed in: hplip (Ubuntu)
Status: Confirmed => Invalid
** Changed in: ubuntu-meta (Ubuntu)
Status: Confirmed => Triaged
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch seeded packages,
** Changed in: rsyslog (Ubuntu)
Status: In Progress => Fix Committed
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to rsyslog in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2028935
Title:
Merge rsyslog 8.2306.0-2
Status
** Changed in: rsyslog (Ubuntu)
Assignee: (unassigned) => Julian Andres Klode (juliank)
** Changed in: rsyslog (Ubuntu)
Status: Incomplete => Triaged
** Changed in: rsyslog (Ubuntu)
Status: Triaged => In Progress
--
You received this bug notification because you are
Heinrich please note that the previous Debian version is a bug fix upload that
is adequate to go in now (that we might want for the `Update logcheck rules for
latest debian defaults.
` bug fix), whereas the new Debian version is a new upstream release that has
to wait for next cycle most likely.
rk auto hello && apt remove ?garbage -y"
Not sure when it regressed
** Summary changed:
- apt-patterns does not work as described in man pages
+ ?garbage does not work correctly in install commands
** Changed in: apt (Ubuntu)
Importance: Undecided => High
** Changed in: a
I think this is a regression of "Call MarkAndSweep only manually in apt-
get for autoremove"
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to apt in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1995790
Title:
regression: ?garbage
How updates and optional reboot requests are surfaced is a pretty
complex, I do not feel we can adequately address this in a bug report,
it's part of a much wider story about the Pro client.
I'll go ahead and assign this to server as they own the pro client
integration bits and are in the process
Removing rls-mm-incoming, as this seems to be done.
** Tags removed: rls-mm-incoming
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to glib2.0 in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2026826
Title:
glib2.0 (2.77.0 ) break
This bug is about a specific crash in apt-config, not about installer
crashing during password entry, please use the other bug for that.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to apt in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net
The bug report description seems unrelated to the bug report, the
reported crash is a crash in apt while trying to open
"/usr/share/dpkg/tupletable". As we can see in the stack trace, the call
arguments all make sense.
So either there's a weird bug in libc6, apt is corrupting the memory
prior to t
rootdir generally expects a writable directory, but it seems like a nice
idea to make it not write a sources.list if sources.list.d exist
** Changed in: python-apt (Ubuntu)
Importance: Undecided => Low
** Changed in: python-apt (Ubuntu)
Status: New => Triaged
--
You received this bug
** Package changed: command-not-found (Ubuntu) => python3.10 (Ubuntu)
** Also affects: sqlite3 (Ubuntu)
Importance: Undecided
Status: New
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to sqlite3 in Ubuntu.
https://bu
Right so it seems we forgot to bump the size requirements in ubuntu-
release-upgrader when bumping them in the installer in bug 1959971, you
probably should not have been able to upgrade. Albeit the size it seems
is determined from the initramfs that is in /boot.
We also don't seem to acccount for
** Also affects: ubuntu-release-upgrader (Ubuntu)
Importance: Undecided
Status: New
** Summary changed:
- APT installs 3 kernels at once so /boot runs out of free space left and
partition size does not increase alongside with newer ubuntu versions
+ Bump minimum /boot size in ubuntu-re
We generally don't know how much space is going to be needed. APT only
keeps 2 kernel versions around, and the /boot partition is sized
accordingly for 3.
If you override this by marking kernels as manually installed, or
manually installing other versions you need to ensure that there is
enough sp
Yes that's unfortunate and fixed in the apt command I think (it should
only allow * glob wildcards), but we can't fix it in apt-get for
backwards compatibility reasons.
** Changed in: apt (Ubuntu)
Status: New => Won't Fix
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of U
So e.g. on mantic:
jak@jak-t14-g3:~:master$ apt-get install python3.6 -s
NOTE: This is only a simulation!
apt-get needs root privileges for real execution.
Keep also in mind that locking is deactivated,
so don't depend on the relevance to the real current situation!
Reading packa
** Description changed:
[Impact]
gnome-shell gets removed on upgrades of gnome-shell and mutter if due to
phasing we can only upgrade src:gnome-shell.
[Test plan]
This adds a minimal test case to the test suite that reproduced the issue and
verifies the fix, test plan consists of the
apt is not responsible for ubuntu pro messages. As advertised by the
introductory message you can turn off pro's news feature with sudo pro
config set apt_news=False
** Package changed: apt (Ubuntu) => ubuntu-advantage-tools (Ubuntu)
** Changed in: ubuntu-advantage-tools (Ubuntu)
Status: N
Generally the way to do this in Debian at least would be something like
1. move the removed dependencies/recommends to a ubuntu-desktop-legacy
metapackage/seed
2. recommend that so it is installed
3. one cycle later, drop the recommends (or move it to suggests to keep it
installed on upgrades*)
The approach to take would be to add a block-proposed-jammy tag and then
the SRU can be processed and it will just say in proposed until another
SRU gets along that replaces (and includes) it, but at least it's built
and reviewed and visible to everyone.
--
You received this bug notification beca
I have adjusted the manual page in git to say 23.10 but this may be
postponed to 24.04 once more.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to apt in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2004505
Title:
apt-key is stil
The regression fix causes an issue whereby any new dependencies or
recommends of updates that are phasing will be installed, we're
currently investigating how to solve this, I believe this is also a
problem in the apt upgrade code path (which can install new packages),
but not in apt-get upgrade.
** No longer affects: command-not-found (Ubuntu)
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to python-apt in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2025965
Title:
aptsources deb822 Section constructor fails on valid .sou
** Tags added: foundations-todo
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to apt in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2025462
Title:
Apt deletes ubuntu-desktop during dist-upgrade
Status in apt package in Ubuntu:
One thing I just noticed is that if you have something like gnome-shell
and mutter where gnome-shell depends on the new mutter and only mutter
is "not for us" we end up with something like:
The following packages have been kept back:
gnome-shell gnome-shell-common mutter
with phasing specific m
** Description changed:
+ [Impact]
+ gnome-shell gets removed on upgrades of gnome-shell and mutter if due to
phasing we can only upgrade src:gnome-shell.
+
+ [Test plan]
+ This adds a minimal test case to the test suite that reproduced the issue and
verifies the fix, test plan consists of the
** Also affects: apt (Ubuntu Kinetic)
Importance: Undecided
Status: New
** Also affects: apt (Ubuntu Mantic)
Importance: Critical
Assignee: Julian Andres Klode (juliank)
Status: In Progress
** Also affects: apt (Ubuntu Lunar)
Importance: Undecided
Status: New
Written a minimal test case reproducing the issue, and wrote a fix in
https://salsa.debian.org/apt-team/apt/-/merge_requests/299
** Changed in: apt (Ubuntu)
Assignee: (unassigned) => Julian Andres Klode (juliank)
** Changed in: apt (Ubuntu)
Status: Triaged => In Progress
-
** Changed in: apt (Ubuntu)
Status: Incomplete => Triaged
** Changed in: apt (Ubuntu)
Importance: Undecided => Critical
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to apt in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/
I believe this is a regression from
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/python3.10/+bug/1990586 which
I know sounds hilarious because it was fixing another issue like this
but here is what I believe happened:
- mutter and gnome-shell were released on the same day
- gnome-shell was eligible t
To debug the solver we'd also need an EDSP dump from that operation but
I think we're out of luck.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to apt in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2025462
Title:
Apt deletes ub
Please attach /var/log/apt/history.log files showing at least the
upgrade and the previous one.
** Changed in: apt (Ubuntu)
Status: New => Incomplete
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to apt in Ubuntu.
https
Newer releases of Ubuntu can always start making use of new file system
feature flags. Looking at all currently supported releases (whether
standard or ESM), we have never SRUed e2fsprogs before, it only ever
received security updates, so I'd be inclined to not do a backport here
either and resolve
It's all the same people on both sides and I didn't close the Debian bug
so it's on my mind, but that's hard to have a general process for.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to software-properties in
Ubuntu.
https:/
This is not correct, apt-key is deprecated *because it requires gpg*,
not in favor of gpg, and gpg is not installed anymore, since we
specifically reworked the packaging to get a small minimal gpgv for
verification.
There is no way to fix apt-key as it requires gpg and is fundamentally
misaligned
Please actually read the warning message. Also read the warning message
apt-key gives you:
Warning: apt-key is deprecated. Manage keyring files in trusted.gpg.d
instead (see apt-key(8)).
** Changed in: apt (Ubuntu)
Status: New => Invalid
--
You received this bug notification because you
** Tags removed: rls-jj-incoming
** Tags added: foundations-todo
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to openssl in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2023545
Title:
[UBUNTU 22.04] openssl with ibmca engine con
** Tags removed: rls-mm-incoming
** Tags added: foundations-todo
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to powermgmt-base in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1980991
Title:
/usr/sbin/on_ac_power incorrectly rep
** Package changed: apt (Ubuntu) => grub2 (Ubuntu)
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to apt in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2023973
Title:
Low priority. Documentation. Suggestion : improve error messag
As you can see in the output grub-common failed to install because the
service failed to restart which edits the /boot/grub/grubenv file. This
indicates the file is corrupted either due to a bug in grub we don't
know about, a hard reset during grub running which corrupted the disk
cache or somethin
While I cherry-picked the fix, as this only affects Debian, I'm going to
mark the bug as Won't Fix.
** Changed in: software-properties (Ubuntu)
Status: In Progress => Won't Fix
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch seeded packages, which is subscri
Ubuntu 18.04 has reached it's end of standard support, hence marking
won't fix.
** Changed in: network-manager (Ubuntu Bionic)
Status: Triaged => Won't Fix
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to network-manage
The reasoning for rejection on the Debian side seems valid, and since
that's a universe package maintained by the community it's best left
that way.
** Changed in: qtchooser (Ubuntu)
Status: Confirmed => Won't Fix
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
To
Reassigning and marking incomplete as we can't act on that if we don't
have a reproducer or know why it happened to not chown() when it moved
the file out of partial/
** Package changed: update-manager (Ubuntu) => apt (Ubuntu)
** Changed in: apt (Ubuntu)
Status: New => Incomplete
--
You
Public bug reported:
As part of my sandboxed APT I noticed that the package failed to install
as it was trying to write to /root.
/root is a user directory, not a system one, which may not even exist
because the administrator changed it to like /home/root, for example,
and we definitely should no
I think you need to url encode the sequence, but not sure. I don't think
there's anything we can do here about handling backslashes, the problem
is backspaces do happen in actual config items and we can't introduce a
behavior change for them as that would cause regressions.
You should be free to a
That's a hashicorp problem if they serve repositories without by-hash or
atomically updated dists/ directory, this bug here is solved.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to apt in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/b
Generally for reproducing issues I set Phased-Update-Percentage to 0 on
the packages the user had phased so it's independent of machine-id, it's
not been a problem in my experience to reproduce issues.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch seeded packages,
** Package changed: update-manager (Ubuntu) => openldap (Ubuntu)
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to openldap in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2017927
Title:
Failed to start SLAPD and B&R operation fai
I did not make any changes to the design when moving it from Update-
Manager in apt, it's been this way for 10 years now, it's a proven
concept.
The initial implementation used and md5 but the math gets complex when
dealing with 128 bit integers.
You can easily override the machine-id for apt by
If those are your only two kernels both should be kept. If you have a
higher versioned kernel, it's correct that 1100 is removed. That's a
feature, not a bug.
Also don't do that.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed t
Deleting InRelease files from the repository is not supported. The
release file is mandatory for phased update support to correctly ignore
phasing for security updates, as it identifies security repositories
based on the Archive: field in the InRelease file.
** Changed in: apt (Ubuntu)
Stat
There's more complexity of course because I only talk about the first
of the two solvers apt runs. The first solver marks the changes based on
following the graph from the user-initiated actions downward to
dependencies, marking Depends for install, Conflicts for remove, and so
on.
If that produc
This is the expected behavior of apt, and a deeply integral part of the
solver algorithm, that it does not try to remove packages that have an
upgrade available. So that's not something I'd want to touch because the
regression potential is huge.
You can always use pass systemd-timesyncd- to apt in
** Also affects: binutils (Ubuntu Lunar)
Importance: Undecided
Status: New
** Changed in: binutils (Ubuntu Lunar)
Assignee: (unassigned) => Nick Rosbrook (enr0n)
** Changed in: binutils (Ubuntu Lunar)
Importance: Undecided => High
--
You received this bug notification because
As #1 says, the file permissions for the keyring are wrong. They should
be world-readable, or at the very least readable by _apt
** Changed in: apt (Ubuntu)
Status: Confirmed => Invalid
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch seeded packages, which i
There has always been a difference between which packages are upgradable
and which packages will be upgraded, this is not exactly new and phasing
dependent.
If A is phasing and B depends on that new A, both will be kept back.
While apt list --upgradable could hide A, it can't hide B - it doesn't
c
bionic: apt 1.6.17, Started with linux-image-4.15.0-208-generic
Log:
1. (in 208) installed 206
2. (in 208) no kernels to autoremove
3. (in 208) installed 204
4. (in 208) SUCCESS: autoremove would remove 204
5. (in 204) SUCCESS: After reboot into 204, 206 is autoremovable and 204, 208
are kept
6.
FWIW, the mmdebstrap issue is resolved in lunar, I'm not sure it makes a
whole lot of sense to fix kinetic to release apt 2-3 months before EOL
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to apt in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launch
I'm going to set this to Won't Fix because that seems to be an important
part of the solver logic, and the workarounds - running upgrade first,
or using ubuntu-drivers - are easy to do and the potential for
regression significantly outweighs them.
This will get solved eventually by a nicer solver
** Changed in: apt (Ubuntu)
Status: Triaged => Won't Fix
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to apt in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1992513
Title:
apt will not install nvidia-driver-470-server if
I think we debugged this recently but I'm not sure where the end result
of this is that we do not mark packages for removal that have an upgrade
available, hence we end up without a removal request after the first
stage solver, and the Conflicts solver that runs after can't solve that.
--
You rec
Reproduced issue and dumped test case into https://salsa.debian.org/apt-
team/apt-tests/-/blob/main/edsp/fail-ubuntu-1992513.edsp.log for future
analysis when doing solver work.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to
201 - 300 of 1001 matches
Mail list logo
