Piotr Drozdek wrote:
> Dnia 2011-03-31, o godz. 20:11:40
> Thomas Hungenberg <th+lists-deb...@demonium.de> napisał(a):
>
>> Piotr Drozdek wrote:
>> > Show me results of
>> > apt-cache policy tex-common
>>
>> tex-common:
>> Installed: 2.08
>> Candidate: 2.08.1
>> Version table:
>> 2.08.1 0
>> 500 http://security.debian.org/ squeeze/updates/main i386
>> Packages *** 2.08 0
>> 500 http://ftp.de.debian.org/debian/ squeeze/main i386
>> Packages 100 /var/lib/dpkg/status
>>
>>
>> > dpkg --get-selections |grep tex-common
>>
>> tex-common install
>>
>>
>> - Thomas
>>
>>
>
> Everything looks fine. Candidate is a new version.
> Do upgrade by typing:
>
> apt-get update
> aptitude full-upgrade
Interesting... 'aptitude full-upgrade' works:
# aptitude -s full-upgrade
The following packages will be upgraded:
bind9-host dnsutils libbind9-60 libdns69 libisc62 libisccc60 libisccfg62
liblwres60
tex-common
9 packages upgraded, 0 newly installed, 0 to remove and 0 not upgraded.
but 'aptitude update' misses the security update for 'tex-common':
# aptitude -s upgrade
The following packages will be upgraded:
bind9-host dnsutils libbind9-60 libdns69 libisc62 libisccc60 libisccfg62
liblwres60
8 packages upgraded, 0 newly installed, 0 to remove and 1 not upgraded.
I just noticed that the package 'tex-common' is marked 'id' in aptitude:
# aptitude search tex-common
id tex-common - common infrastructure for building and installing TeX
Maybe this is the reason?
There are dozens of other packages marked 'id', like debian-keyring, strace, ...
I don't think this was the case before the upgrade from lenny to squeeze.
- Thomas
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-security-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4d958d30.9070...@demonium.de
