apt/test/integration/test-external-dependency-solver-protocol, branch 1.3_pre1Debians commandline package managerhttps://git.kalnischkies.de/apt/atom?h=1.3_pre12016-06-08T11:07:21Zedsp: optionally store a compressed copy of the last scenario2016-06-08T11:07:21ZDavid Kalnischkiesdavid@kalnischkies.de2016-06-07T15:01:33Zurn:sha1:385d9f2f23057bc5808b5e013e77ba16d1c94da4
For bugreports and co it could be handy to have the scenario and all the
settings used in it around later for inspection for EDSP like protocols.
EDSP might not be the most interesting as the user can still interrupt
the process before the solution is applied and users tend to have an
opinion on the "rightness" of a solution, so it is disabled by default.
edsp: use an ID mapping for the internal solver2016-06-04T16:45:01ZDavid Kalnischkiesdavid@kalnischkies.de2016-06-04T16:45:01Zurn:sha1:307d9eb2d13ee59191b86ffec2f36ba3fffc5c20
Currently an EDSP solver gets send basically all versions which means
the absolute count is the same, but that might not be true forever (and
with the skipping of rc-only versions it kinda is already) and even if
it were true, segfaulting on bad input seems wrong.
refactor EDSP code into EDSP and EDSP-like parts2016-05-20T12:32:44ZDavid Kalnischkiesdavid@kalnischkies.de2016-05-14T16:07:12Zurn:sha1:5caf35a7e4bd573a22ff7ed0c686c1cf516eeaf0
No real code change, just moving code around heavily to decouple the
EDSP specific parts from those we can reuse for EDSP-like protocols.
Git-Dch: Ignore
edsp: warn if unexpected stanzas appear in the solution2016-05-12T14:21:10ZDavid Kalnischkiesdavid@kalnischkies.de2016-05-12T14:21:10Zurn:sha1:90e7fba4ac16fc764bf6aac7b59c17c3be551b60
Unexpected are for examples removal requests for versions which aren't
installed, installations of already installed versions & requests to
install and remove a package at the same time.
tests: expect no output while compiling noopchroot2016-03-06T08:39:30ZDavid Kalnischkiesdavid@kalnischkies.de2016-02-16T15:02:46Zurn:sha1:a66e1837812cefc1f08788f8696724d4931e8022
This way we hopefully notice (new) warnings in this little helper.
Git-Dch: Ignore
tests: support spaces in path and TMPDIR2015-12-19T22:04:34ZDavid Kalnischkiesdavid@kalnischkies.de2015-12-15T16:20:26Zurn:sha1:3abb6a6a1e485b3bc899b64b0a1b7dc2db25a9c2
This doesn't allow all tests to run cleanly, but it at least allows to
write tests which could run successfully in such environments.
Git-Dch: Ignore
tests: use quiet level 0 by default in tests2015-11-19T16:13:56ZDavid Kalnischkiesdavid@kalnischkies.de2015-11-19T15:00:33Zurn:sha1:87d6947d51717e8b0e975d913986161598a7259a
Git-Dch: Ignore
support arch:all data e.g. in separate Packages file2015-11-04T17:42:27ZDavid Kalnischkiesdavid@kalnischkies.de2015-10-28T13:38:49Zurn:sha1:1dd20368486820efb6ef4476ad739e967174bec4
Based on a discussion with Niels Thykier who asked for Contents-all this
implements apt trying for all architecture dependent files to get a file
for the architecture all, which is treated internally now as an official
architecture which is always around (like native). This way arch:all
data can be shared instead of duplicated for each architecture requiring
the user to download the same information again and again.
There is one problem however: In Debian there is already a binary-all/
Packages file, but the binary-any files still include arch:all packages,
so that downloading this file now would be a waste of time, bandwidth
and diskspace. We therefore need a way to decide if it makes sense to
download the all file for Packages in Debian or not. The obvious answer
would be a special flag in the Release file indicating this, which would
need to default to 'no' and every reasonable repository would override
it to 'yes' in a few years time, but the flag would be there "forever".
Looking closer at a Release file we see the field "Architectures", which
doesn't include 'all' at the moment. With the idea outlined above that
'all' is a "proper" architecture now, we interpret this field as being
authoritative in declaring which architectures are supported by this
repository. If it says 'all', apt will try to get all, if not it will be
skipped. This gives us another interesting feature: If I configure a
source to download armel and mips, but it declares it supports only
armel apt will now print a notice saying as much. Previously this was a
very cryptic failure. If on the other hand the repository supports mips,
too, but for some reason doesn't ship mips packages at the moment, this
'missing' file is silently ignored (= that is the same as the repository
including an empty file).
The Architectures field isn't mandatory through, so if it isn't there,
we assume that every architecture is supported by this repository, which
skips the arch:all if not listed in the release file.
sanify API to get 'the' candidate version2015-11-04T17:04:05ZDavid Kalnischkiesdavid@kalnischkies.de2015-10-30T15:34:25Zurn:sha1:294a80209a0c6ea617a14fb2ae650d4fd329eab5
This was discussed a while ago on #debian-apt and now that I see myself
making this mistake lets bite the bullet and fix it in the easy way out
version: Using a new name which fits with a similar named setter and
deprecate the old method instead of 'hostily' changing API.
Closes: #803471
suggest 'apt autoremove' to get right of unneeded packages2015-11-04T17:04:01ZDavid Kalnischkiesdavid@kalnischkies.de2015-10-16T10:54:14Zurn:sha1:73fe49f9b4748eddb5a2dad4f0abb51a8f63564c
The bugreport is more conservative in asking for a conditional, but
given that this is a message intended to be read by users to be run by
users we should suggest using a command intended to be used by users.
And while we are at, add sudo to the message – conditional of course.
Closes: 801571