Your message dated Sun, 22 Apr 2001 14:36:49 +0100
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line dpkg-mountable removed from Debian unstable
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.)
Darren Benham
(administrator, Debian Bugs database)
--------------------------------------
Received: (at submit) by bugs.debian.org; 17 Jun 1998 21:54:44 +0000
Received: (qmail 24813 invoked from network); 17 Jun 1998 21:54:42 -0000
Received: from irwell.zetnet.co.uk ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
by debian.novare.net with SMTP; 17 Jun 1998 21:54:42 -0000
Received: from beaker.zetnet.co.uk ([EMAIL PROTECTED] [194.247.40.192])
by irwell.zetnet.co.uk (8.8.7/8.8.5) with SMTP id WAA04250;
Wed, 17 Jun 1998 22:54:19 +0100
Received: from asm21 by beaker.zetnet.co.uk with local (Exim 1.82 #1)
id 0ymOvy-0001D3-00 (Debian); Wed, 17 Jun 1998 21:35:54 +0100
To: Bob Hilliard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: updated packages and gratuitous unpacks (was Re: test of
dpkg-mountable)
References: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
From: Andy Mortimer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 17 Jun 1998 21:35:53 +0100
In-Reply-To: Bob Hilliard's message of Mon, 25 May 1998 22:00:04 -0400 (EDT)
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Lines: 54
X-Mailer: Gnus v5.4.37/XEmacs 19.16
Sender: Andy Mortimer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Package: dpkg-mountable
Severity: wishlist
Hi Bob,
Sorry for the delay in replying, hope it's still useful.
Bob Hilliard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I recently had some difficulties in a test upgrade, using
> dpkg-mountable. The underlying cause was a Packages file that was out
> of sync with the mirror, so that three packages, two of them important
> libraries, were one version higher than indicated in the package
> file. Therefore, they were not installed, causing numerous other
> packages to fail to configure.
Nice. Unfortunately, not something that dpkg-mountable is designed to cope
with, although perhaps it should. OTOH one could argue that if the mirror is
having problems they may be more fundamental than dpkg-mountable could
trivially take (think epochs, for instance), so it's best not to do anything.
> I manually installed the missing packages before starting a
> second Install pass, but the error messages continued to report that
> configurations failed because those packages weren't installed. I
> forgot to repeat Update before the second run. Would a second Update
> step have fixed that?
I'm not sure; it's not clear exactly what went wrong, at least to me. I
wouldn't have expected it to, though ... that's a dpkg function, and I seem to
be having more and more difficulty working out what dpkg is doing recently. :(
> When a second Install pass is made, it appears that all packages
> are unpacked again. I think it would be helpful if you called dpkg -i
> with the -E option. Of course that may break something I'm not aware of.
Not as far as I know; the problem is that dpkg-mountable doesn't actually do
dpkg -i, it does dpkg --unpack followed by dpkg --configure. I keep wondering
whether to change this -- I did it originally cos I could! -- but I hadn't
come up with a reason; this may be one. (I'm assuming that -E doesn't work
with --unpack; if it does, you've just solved my problem, and you're even more
of a star!)
Thanks for your input. I've copied this to the bug system so it doesn't get
lost!
Andy
--
Andy Mortimer, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.poboxes.com/andy.mortimer
PGP public key available on key servers
--
The horror did me good;
The magic was on my side.
---------------------------------------
Received: (at 23658-done) by bugs.debian.org; 22 Apr 2001 13:36:40 +0000
>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sun Apr 22 08:36:40 2001
Return-path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Received: from web1.lanscape.net [64.240.156.194]
by master.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.12 1 (Debian))
id 14rK2Y-0002v2-00; Sun, 22 Apr 2001 08:36:38 -0500
Received: from fisch.cyrius.com (web1.lanscape.net [64.240.156.194])
by web1.lanscape.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id IAA21428;
Sun, 22 Apr 2001 08:36:23 -0500
Received: by fisch.cyrius.com (Postfix, from userid 1000)
id 38987229CF; Sun, 22 Apr 2001 14:36:49 +0100 (BST)
Date: Sun, 22 Apr 2001 14:36:49 +0100
From: Martin Michlmayr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED],
[EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED],
[EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED],
[EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED],
[EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED],
[EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: dpkg-mountable removed from Debian unstable
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
dpkg-mountable has been removed from Debian unstable and won't be
released with the next official release of Debian, codenamed "woody".
The original maintainer writes:
| * I can no longer test new versions of this package, as I'm using
| apt-zip rather than my not-free dialup access. I wrote it when I
| was accessing the University's NFS archive mirror!
|
| * It's slightly buggy, and badly out-of-date policy-wise.
|
| * Apt now provides (AFAIK) all the features provided by
| dpkg-mountable, and some (such as package ordering) that it never
| got around to getting.
Please switch to apt.
If you have questions about this, please contact me.
--
Martin Michlmayr
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
