Debians commandline package manager https://git.kalnischkies.de/apt/atom?h=2.9.3 2024-05-14T09:56:18Z 2024-05-14T09:56:18Z Julian Andres Klode julian.klode@canonical.com 2024-05-08T14:14:18Z urn:sha1:6f504c0fea67aca176b68ba79490fc811d1371fe It relies on removing packages, so we must allow it to. To see if it does the right thing, mark all packages automatically installed. 2024-05-14T09:56:18Z Julian Andres Klode julian.klode@canonical.com 2024-05-08T14:14:05Z urn:sha1:734eb9ac3f65e38ac3ba7f2d50ea206743a6f611 2024-04-29T14:33:41Z Julian Andres Klode jak@debian.org 2024-04-29T14:33:41Z urn:sha1:4a76c77d1cd3f07c01d5908cca539ed90d1793d3 showsrc, source, build-dep: Support src:name See merge request apt-team/apt!346 2024-04-29T13:26:25Z Julian Andres Klode julian.klode@canonical.com 2024-04-29T13:14:24Z urn:sha1:84881c1914ca30435ff478b4138cd7559c35c8d1 This has the same behavior as --only-source name. 2024-04-29T12:56:41Z Julian Andres Klode julian.klode@canonical.com 2024-04-29T12:56:41Z urn:sha1:9a29aa8f61530aca8a46d0c6de08ea78c6e57f9e This has the same meaning as --only-source name 2024-04-26T20:10:30Z David Kalnischkies david@kalnischkies.de 2024-04-26T18:50:49Z urn:sha1:c98bcdf00e5366fec101dd17094d36be21872a02 If dpkg-gencontrol was involved in the creation of a package we will not usually encounter empty or otherwise useless fields, but apparently not everyone is using it. It isn't recommended to have these empty lines, but it isn't too hard to ignore for Provides as we did for dependencies already and apt-ftparchive can be convinced to produce empty files (if you feed it such a package) as well, so lets be nice and provide users with a more accepting parser. Closes: #1069874 2024-04-24T13:16:21Z David Kalnischkies david@kalnischkies.de 2024-04-04T13:36:24Z urn:sha1:7a1063e81b855ac7ff9ee54f115843c3af6dd1bf Our code does the right thing currently, so lets add a test to ensure this keeps being the case in the future. 2024-04-24T13:16:21Z David Kalnischkies david@kalnischkies.de 2024-04-23T16:13:46Z urn:sha1:9c06578c37ff77b70b9d978d48528df13e13530f Our autoremoval-advertisment is modified by SUDO_USER as if the current apt call was made with sudo it seems a good idea to show the ad with sudo as well. That is annoying for our tests through as normally the tests are run locally or by autopkgtest without sudo, but in Gitlab CI we use it (to run our tests as user… as we are already root) and so individual tests had to deal with this. That is annoying and really not needed as we can have our autoremove test check that this ad gets displayed the right way and ignore it the rest of the time. 2024-04-24T13:16:21Z David Kalnischkies david@kalnischkies.de 2024-03-14T20:59:10Z urn:sha1:d030a1041b243c45dcd41e34d3c2b21cf1a533ba We schedule reverse dependencies for an upgrade, but we shouldn't do it if we have ear-marked this package for removal later on. Usually the solver will end up doing the right thing like it already did in the included testcase in the end, but given that before it reaches the right end it explored a bad path which can lead to more installs and removals influencing later decisions or are just too hard for the resolver to undo later on, we can just not explore this path to begin with. References: e077370ffcb3669a50a600e80356c2002e6b176d 2024-04-24T13:16:21Z David Kalnischkies david@kalnischkies.de 2024-04-03T19:12:01Z urn:sha1:e099ee946000797f4c03b8c5075ce7ebba193337 We remove new garbage packages from the solution if we can as installing a new package which is at the same time considered garbage looks silly, but it could also be a new dependency of another garbage package, so we have a second round trying to save such packages. In this round we weren't considering versioned constraints on dependency relations through so even an unsatisfied old recommends could save which it shouldn't.