found 139615 0.6.3-3.2 thanks On Sat, May 23, 2009 at 11:13:52AM +0200, martin f krafft wrote: > found 139615 0.4.11.11-1~lenny1 > found 139615 0.4.11.11-1+b1 > thanks > > also sprach Daniel Burrows <[email protected]> [2002.04.25.0115 +0200]: > > It seems my upload didn't fix this, and I forgot to untag the report. > > This bug is still around. Is there any chance of having it fixed, > also via stable-proposed-updates?
This bug is still present in current unstable (Feb 2011).
I've run into this issue when doing a whole archive rebuild with
sbuild's aptitude build dependency resolver. I saw several
instances of packages which failed to build, but reported the
failures as build failures rather than build dependency install
failures. This was because aptitude failed to install (unresolvable)
build dependencies, but did not then return a zero exit status.
sbuild needs to know if aptitude succeeded or failed. The only way
it can do this reliably is if aptitude tells it using the exit status.
This should be a very simple bug to fix. Aptitude knows if it did
what the user asked it to do, it just needs to return it. This
really deserves fixing in stable as well, IMO.
% sudo aptitude install unavailable-nonexistent-package
Couldn't find any package whose name or description matched
"unavailable-nonexistent-package"
Couldn't find any package whose name or description matched
"unavailable-nonexistent-package"
No packages will be installed, upgraded, or removed.
0 packages upgraded, 0 newly installed, 0 to remove and 1 not upgraded.
Need to get 0 B of archives. After unpacking 0 B will be used.
Why report that "No packages will be installed, upgraded, or removed."
and all the rest of the other information after that. aptitude should
have bailed out with an error message and a nonzero exit status well
before that, when it realised that it could not carry out the task the
user requested.
% echo $?
0
% sudo apt-get install unavailable-nonexistent-package
Reading package lists... Done
Building dependency tree
Reading state information... Done
E: Unable to locate package unavailable-nonexistent-package
% echo $?
100
Matching apt-get's exit codes would be ideall, but a simple nonzero
on failure would be a good start. Also note the point at which
apt-get bailed out. Matching this behaviour would also be a good
plan.
Many thanks,
Roger
--
.''`. Roger Leigh
: :' : Debian GNU/Linux http://people.debian.org/~rleigh/
`. `' Printing on GNU/Linux? http://gutenprint.sourceforge.net/
`- GPG Public Key: 0x25BFB848 Please GPG sign your mail.
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
