Debians commandline package manager https://git.kalnischkies.de/apt/atom?h=2.7.11 2022-02-10T17:35:53Z 2022-02-10T17:35:53Z David Kalnischkies david@kalnischkies.de 2022-02-08T14:39:45Z urn:sha1:24d4cf6216ded26e6a6517a46c6f9115275b7136 Our EDSP code is confused by the spaces in the package name, so we adopt a naming scheme similar to build-dep here instead of trying to teach EDSP to somehow encode the spaces as that is probably even more confusing for onlookers than this invalid package name is. Reported-By: Johannes Schauer Marin Rodrigues on IRC 2021-11-27T10:22:38Z Ville Skyttä ville.skytta@iki.fi 2021-11-03T22:08:07Z urn:sha1:01eed4234440d82fc52c8186cf4268517bcd28bc 2021-11-23T13:18:25Z David Kalnischkies david@kalnischkies.de 2021-11-09T19:37:18Z urn:sha1:dd81b736095f244454c7f179e67f21c08f3fbce9 The Debian 11 release notes elevate matching with regex to a documented and much used feature, which it previously wasn't. For binary packages this is not a problem, but source packages are special and it turns out that matching by release is here an exact string match only. A bit of refactoring later we can reuse the code we use for Packages files also for Release files, which is what we have for Sources files as those files itself have no representation in the cache. This means that we do not support matching based on components (c=main) in source, but we didn't before and we can cross that bridge if anyone notices… Closes: #998444 2021-09-04T14:20:12Z David Kalnischkies david@kalnischkies.de 2021-09-04T14:10:50Z urn:sha1:70c669e2566d119559d2986635bb6c1d0d368073 APT is not the place this information should be stored at, but it is a good place to experiment and see what will be (not) needed in the future for a proper implementation higher up the stack. This is why "BarbarianArchitectures" is chosen instead of a more neutral and/or sensible "VeryForeign" and isn't readily exported in the API to other clients for this PoC as a to be drawn up standard will likely require potentially incompatible changes. Having a then outdated and slightly different implementation block a "good" name would be bad. The functionality itself mostly exists (ignoring bugs) since the introduction of MultiArch as we always had the risk of encountering packages of architectures not known to dpkg (forced onto the system, potentially before MultiArch) we had to deal with somehow and other edge cases. All this commit really does is allowing what could previously only be achieved with editing sources.list and some conf options via a single config option: -o APT::BarbarianArchitectures=foo,bar 2021-09-04T13:35:15Z David Kalnischkies david@kalnischkies.de 2021-08-16T22:04:14Z urn:sha1:017b3d0ae5232628c15324204e607e76487afb99 Back than M-A was added to build-dependencies (#558104) only the qualifiers :native and :any were considered at first which for the native case behave the same, so stripping was a good idea. Nowadays we could encounter arch-qualified dependencies, too, through – or slightly more likely conflicts perhaps – at least in theory as in practice native build-dep operations in Debian and elsewhere wouldn't have other architectures available anyhow. Still, we have full support for all this for the crossbuilding case which makes active use of this (at least is far more likely to do so), so it seems better to converge on one edgecase rather than keeping two in active use and so produce potentially different results for not specifying -a and -a $native. 2021-04-29T08:28:08Z Julian Andres Klode jak@debian.org 2021-04-29T08:28:08Z urn:sha1:a6cb741a2cd1fa132705f8f5644872fc9708fb68 Count uninstallable packages in "not upgraded" See merge request apt-team/apt!169 2021-04-26T11:00:24Z David Kalnischkies david@kalnischkies.de 2021-03-18T16:37:49Z urn:sha1:d6f3458badf2cfea3ca7de7632ae31daff5742be An interactive tool like aptitude needs these flags current far more often than we do as a user can see them in apt only in one very well defined place – the autoremove display block – so we don't need to run it up to four times while a normal "apt install" is processed as that is just busywork. The effect on runtime is minimal, as a single run doesn't take too long anyhow, but it cuts down tremendously on debug output at the expense of requiring some manual handholding. This is opt-in so that aptitude doesn't need to change nor do we need to change our own tools like "apt list" where it is working correctly as intended. A special flag and co is needed as we want to prevent the ActionGroup inside pkgDepCache::Init to be inhibited already so we need to insert ourselves while the DepCache is still in the process of being built. This is also the reason why the debug output in some tests changed to all unmarked, but that is fine as the marking could have been already obsoleted by the actions taken, just inhibited by a proper action group. 2021-04-25T14:25:57Z David Kalnischkies david@kalnischkies.de 2021-03-06T13:12:01Z urn:sha1:f90b892e6acc0ca725811ef0dd9be3fed66c444f If a first step of the solver can figure out that a package is uninstallable it might reset the candidate so that later steps are prevented from exploring this dead end. While that helps the resolver it can confuse the display of the found solution as this will include an incorrect count of packages not upgraded in this solution. It was possible before, but happens a fair bit more with the April/May resolver changes last year so finally doing proper counting is a good idea. Sadly this is a bit harder than just getting the number first and than subtracting the packages we upgraded from it as the user can influence candidates via the command line and a package which could be upgraded, but is removed instead shouldn't count as not upgraded as we clearly did something with it. So we keep a list of packages instead of a number which also help in the upgrade cmds as those want to show the list. Closes: #981535 2019-12-06T12:48:07Z Julian Andres Klode julian.klode@canonical.com 2019-12-06T12:46:58Z urn:sha1:05d1549fb65b00137b22159761462626d11bfe73 apt satisfy "" caused a segmentation fault because we were iterating over the characters, checking if the next character was the end of the string; when it could also be the current character. Instead, check whether the next character is before the end of the string, rather than identical to the end. 2019-07-08T13:51:17Z David Kalnischkies david@kalnischkies.de 2019-07-08T13:48:59Z urn:sha1:2b734a7ec429825c7007c1093883229e069d36c7 Reported-By: cppcheck