On Sat, Aug 09, 2008 at 06:17:47PM +0100, Bob Cox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> was heard
to say:
> On Sat, Aug 09, 2008 at 09:13:33 -0700, Daniel Burrows ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
> wrote:
>
> > On Sat, Aug 09, 2008 at 05:21:32PM +0200, Sven Joachim <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > was heard to say:
> > > It's a bug. If "aptitude safe-upgrade" can't find any packages that are
> > > _not_ on hold (or forbidden), it will try to upgrade packages that you
> > > don't want to. See http://bugs.debian.org/466228.
> >
> > That shouldn't happen now: the dependency resolver should refuse to
> > break holds unless you set Aptitude::ProblemResolver::Allow-Break-Holds
> > to true (it defaults to false). There's one exception I know of, which
> > is that the greedy apt resolver will happily break holds (see #470035),
> > but that doesn't even apply in the case of safe-upgrade. I would be
> > interested in adding "-o Aptitude::CmdLine::Resolver-Debug=true" to the
> > command line and seeing what you get.
>
> I don't quite follow this Daniel, sorry. Doing the above would start
> aptitude in interactive mode? I'm afraid I only use it from the command
> line but can assure you that it is still trying to safe-upgrade two of
> my three held packages as per my original post.
No, it'll spew large amounts of debugging information to your
terminal which you can then paste into a mail to me. :-)
$ aptitude -s -o "Aptitude::CmdLine::Resolver-Debug=true" safe-upgrade
Actually, it would also be helpful if you could produce a resolver
trace:
$ aptitude -s -o "Aptitude::ProblemResolver::Trace-File=/tmp/somefilename"
(pick a file that doesn't exist: aptitude will overwrite it)
Thanks,
Daniel
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
