Re: Transition from dpkg to GNU install-info
On Thu, 23 Apr 2009, Norbert Preining wrote: > Next steps we should do? > - report bugs against those packages failing to provide fully working > info files > - ??? And also file bugs against all info-browsers to request their update as soon as install-info is in unstable. Cheers, -- Raphaël Hertzog Contribuez à Debian et gagnez un cahier de l'admin Debian Lenny : http://www.ouaza.com/wp/2009/03/02/contribuer-a-debian-gagner-un-livre/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-dpkg-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: retrieving the install date of a package
Hi, On Thu, 23 Apr 2009, Christophe Lohr wrote: > I have a question regarding the use of dpkg: how do I find the date on > which a given package was installed on my system? Please use debian-u...@lists.debian.org for user support questions. Hint: check /var/log/dpkg.log Cheers, -- Raphaël Hertzog Contribuez à Debian et gagnez un cahier de l'admin Debian Lenny : http://www.ouaza.com/wp/2009/03/02/contribuer-a-debian-gagner-un-livre/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-dpkg-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: Bug#487437: Please include /etc/dpkg/origins/{debian,default}
On Fri, Mar 27, 2009 at 01:53:19PM +0100, Santiago Vila wrote: > On Mon, 16 Mar 2009, Raphael Hertzog wrote: > > On Wed, 27 Aug 2008, Raphael Hertzog wrote: > > > It's not required for lenny. The code making use of this is only in dpkg > > > 1.15 which will only be uploaded in lenny+1. > > > > Lenny is now released. Can we go forward and have this implemented > > in base-files ? > > Yes, it's now in my todo list for the next upload. > > However, I'd like to address a lenny (and etch) issue first (See Bug #519719). You seem to have done this now, so can I take the liberty of poking about this again? :-) dpkg 1.15.1 (currently unreleased) drops its /etc/dpkg/origins/ files. Thanks, -- Colin Watson [cjwat...@ubuntu.com] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-dpkg-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: Bug#487437: Please include /etc/dpkg/origins/{debian,default}
On Fri, 24 Apr 2009, Colin Watson wrote: > On Fri, Mar 27, 2009 at 01:53:19PM +0100, Santiago Vila wrote: > > On Mon, 16 Mar 2009, Raphael Hertzog wrote: > > > On Wed, 27 Aug 2008, Raphael Hertzog wrote: > > > > It's not required for lenny. The code making use of this is only in dpkg > > > > 1.15 which will only be uploaded in lenny+1. > > > > > > Lenny is now released. Can we go forward and have this implemented > > > in base-files ? > > > > Yes, it's now in my todo list for the next upload. > > > > However, I'd like to address a lenny (and etch) issue first (See Bug > > #519719). > > You seem to have done this now, so can I take the liberty of poking > about this again? :-) dpkg 1.15.1 (currently unreleased) drops its > /etc/dpkg/origins/ files. Working on this now. I'd like to use Replaces with <= and the last release which had the origins file, can you confirm that it is 1.15.0 in experimental? (If yes, I promise to make an upload in short). -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-dpkg-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: Bug#487437: Please include /etc/dpkg/origins/{debian,default}
On Thu, 5 Feb 2009, Colin Watson wrote: > With my Ubuntu hat on (as a frequent uploader of both base-files and > dpkg there): > [...] > * I very definitely prefer the default vendor change to be an explicit > change in base-files' source, rather than being implicit based on > the system on which base-files was built. That's much clearer and is > an insignificant cost for us. Thanks. I'm going to do it that way to keep it simple. After all, it will be trivial to fork in either case, which is the idea here. > I have no particular opinion on any > particular way of creating that symlink, although I would find it a > little bit surprising if a user "sidegraded" from Debian to Ubuntu > or vice-versa and found that their entire system changed *except* > for /etc/dpkg/origins/default. Could you elaborate on that? For example, if we had implemented this a year ago, what would be, in your opinion, the desirable behaviour regardind such symlink when upgrading from Ubuntu 8.10 to lenny, or when upgrading from lenny to Ubuntu 9.04? Perhaps we should store the information about what the default is in a file, not in a symlink, so that dpkg asks about this on upgrades? Otherwise, I don't see a good way to avoid the surprise you describe if we use a symlink for storing such info. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-dpkg-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: Transition from dpkg to GNU install-info
On Fr, 24 Apr 2009, Raphael Hertzog wrote: > > - report bugs against those packages failing to provide fully working > > info files Here is the list I created (format: pkg file). acct usr/share/info/accounting.info.gz barcode usr/share/info/barcode.info.gz bcron usr/share/info/bcron.info.gz diff-doc usr/share/info/diff.info.gz edb usr/share/info/edb.info.gz editors/axe usr/share/info/axe.info.gz emacs-goodies-el usr/share/info/maplev.gz flim usr/share/info/mime-en.info.gz flim usr/share/info/mime-ja.info.gz gmediaserver usr/share/info/gmediaserver.info.gz gtkdialog usr/share/info/gtkdialog.info.gz ispell usr/share/info/ispell.info.gz jargon usr/share/info/jargon.info.gz jed-common usr/share/info/jed.info.gz ladcca-bin usr/share/info/ladcca-manual.info.gz latex2rtf-doc usr/share/info/latex2rtf.info.gz libcloog-ppl-dev usr/share/info/cloog.info.gz libgnucrypto-java usr/share/info/gnu-crypto.info.gz libidn11-dev usr/share/info/libidn-components.png libsnmpkit-dev usr/share/info/snmpkit.info.gz libvformat1-dev usr/share/info/libvformat.info.gz mathgl-doc usr/share/info/mathgl.info.gz menu usr/share/info/menu.info.gz muddleftpd usr/share/info/muddleftpd.info.gz netmask usr/share/info/netmask.info.gz ocaml-doc usr/share/info/ocaml.info.gz oleo usr/share/info/oleo.info.gz opencubicplayer usr/share/info/ocp.info.gz opt usr/share/info/opt.info.gz python2.4-doc usr/share/info/python2.4-api.info.gz python2.4-doc usr/share/info/python2.4-dist.info.gz python2.4-doc usr/share/info/python2.4-ext.info.gz python2.4-doc usr/share/info/python2.4-lib.info.gz python2.4-doc usr/share/info/python2.4-mac.info.gz python2.4-doc usr/share/info/python2.4-ref.info.gz python2.4-doc usr/share/info/python2.4-tut.info.gz python2.5-doc usr/share/info/python2.5-api.info.gz python2.5-doc usr/share/info/python2.5-dist.info.gz python2.5-doc usr/share/info/python2.5-ext.info.gz python2.5-doc usr/share/info/python2.5-lib.info.gz python2.5-doc usr/share/info/python2.5-mac.info.gz python2.5-doc usr/share/info/python2.5-ref.info.gz python2.5-doc usr/share/info/python2.5-tut.info.gz quelcom usr/share/info/quelcom.info.gz realtimebattle-common usr/share/info/RealTimeBattle.info.gz robotfindskitten usr/share/info/robotfindskitten.info.gz sbm usr/share/info/sbm-cz.info.gz sbm usr/share/info/sbm.info.gz sbm usr/share/info/sbm-zh.info.gz semi usr/share/info/mime-ui-en.info.gz semi usr/share/info/mime-ui-ja.info.gz smbc usr/share/info/smbc.info.gz source-highlight usr/share/info/source-highlight.info.gz tcc usr/share/info/tcc.info.gz text/sdic usr/share/info/sdic.info.gz tora usr/share/info/tora.info.gz tua usr/share/info/tua.info.gz vflib3-doc usr/share/info/VFlib-36.info.gz xconq-doc usr/share/info/hacking.info.gz xconq-doc usr/share/info/xcdesign.info.gz xconq-doc usr/share/info/xconq.info.gz xemacs21-support usr/share/info/xemacs21/emodules.info.gz xmorph usr/share/info/xmorph.info.gz yatex usr/share/info/yahtmle.gz yatex usr/share/info/yahtmlj.gz yatex usr/share/info/yatexe.gz yatex usr/share/info/yatexj.gz Since that are 67 files and a bit less packages I guess we have to go thorugh the "mass bug filing" thingy on d-d? Right? > And also file bugs against all info-browsers to request their update > as soon as install-info is in unstable. Ok, will check the list of info browsers. But that should be done only when we have i-i in unstable, not in experimental. But probably we should file bugs already now? What do you say? Best wishes Norbert --- Dr. Norbert Preining Vienna University of Technology Debian Developer Debian TeX Group gpg DSA: 0x09C5B094 fp: 14DF 2E6C 0307 BE6D AD76 A9C0 D2BF 4AA3 09C5 B094 --- BRADFORD A school teacher's old hairy jacket, now severely discoloured by chalk dust, ink, egg and the precipitations of unedifying chemical reactions. --- Douglas Adams, The Meaning of Liff -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-dpkg-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: Bug#487437: Please include /etc/dpkg/origins/{debian,default}
I said: > I'd like to use Replaces with <= and the last release which had the > origins file, can you confirm that it is 1.15.0 in experimental? I see 1.15.0 in experimental, so I'll use that. Uploading now. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-dpkg-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
