Public bug reported:

I'm running Resolute with apt 3.1.11 and amd64v3 enabled (though I
suspect this issue occurs on questing as well) and I've noticed that if
a package is not built for amd64v3 (e.g. libreoffice currently in
resolute) and is available from multiple repositories (in this case,
main and proposed), the updated version in proposed is not shown as an
available update by apt.

I did some digging and noticed that if I do `apt-cache policy
libreoffice-calc`, I see:

libreoffice-calc:
  Installed: 4:25.8.1~rc1-0ubuntu1
  Candidate: 4:25.8.1~rc1-0ubuntu1
  Version table:
 *** 4:25.8.1~rc1-0ubuntu1 500
        500 http://archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu resolute/main amd64v3 Packages

This shows only the version currently in main, not what is in proposed,
and it also shows that it is an amd64v3 package.  However, this is not
correct, as libreoffice 4:25.8.1~rc1-0ubuntu1 is not built for amd64v3.
However, libreoffice 4:25.8.3~rc1-0ubuntu1 exists and is also only built
for amd64, but doesn't show at all.  That makes me suspect that apt may
be misidentifying amd64 packages as amd64v3 packages when no amd64v3
build exists for a certain package, resulting in the later version not
appearing as an available update.

In this specific case, it results in the "all" architecture packages
being shown as available updates, but some are not installable due to
missing dependencies on the packages that aren't shown.

** Affects: apt (Ubuntu)
     Importance: Undecided
         Status: New

-- 
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2130474

Title:
  When using amd64v3, APT seems to misidentify amd64 packages as amd64v3
  if the package is not built for amd64v3, resulting in it not appearing
  in certain circumstances

To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/apt/+bug/2130474/+subscriptions


-- 
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs

Reply via email to