apt/test, branch 2.7.12Debians commandline package managerhttps://git.kalnischkies.de/apt/atom?h=2.7.122024-02-20T18:12:16Ztest-snapshot: Add test case for automatic snapshot2024-02-20T18:12:16ZJulian Andres Klodejulian.klode@canonical.com2024-02-20T18:04:36Zurn:sha1:78c3ad795de7f14de3ee22e9f04fe24b5f21f0ea
1. repository not supporting snapshots, implicit Enabled
2. repository not supporting snapshots, Enabled: yes
3. URL-based lookup, implicit Enabled
test-snapshot: Fix a test case2024-02-20T18:04:03ZJulian Andres Klodejulian.klode@canonical.com2024-02-20T18:04:03Zurn:sha1:1f67cf94ec2df0d30349f033c777495b80b41484
This was accidentally using testfailure instead of
testfailureequal, hence trying to run the output string
as a command :(
Automatically enable snapshots where supported2024-02-20T17:50:14ZJulian Andres Klodejulian.klode@canonical.com2024-02-19T11:07:55Zurn:sha1:b6274188312e6338e94edc45dbf9cc410d650477
Convert sources.list Snapshot option from opt-in to automatic. If
we can find a snapshot server, Snapshot: yes is assumed if a snapshot
is specified.
On the implementation side, we record automatic snapshot enablement
by adding a '?' suffix to the snapshot timestamp, if any is specified,
this avoids introducing bugs into the code where we could end up with
an empty snapshot.
This has an annoying internal implementation caveat: Since we call
GetDebReleaseIndexBy() with the SHADOWED option emplaced, if we do
not find a server, we need to remove the SHADOWED option again, but
we already have inserted a shadowed release index into the list.
This will simply insert the release index a second time without the
SHADOWED option which in preliminary testing works fine, but it would
arguably be more correct to also remove the release index again if
we have created it.
FIXME: This only has one test case: A source with supported snapshot
server is auto-discovered. We should also add a test case where we
cannot detect a server and then don't fail in automatic mode.
Modernize standard library includes2024-02-20T12:49:04ZJulian Andres Klodejulian.klode@canonical.com2024-02-20T12:43:08Zurn:sha1:40a75722c43ae24cb9a99d6730a3b25b65819c49
This was automated with sed and git-clang-format, and then I had to
fix up the top of policy.cc by hand as git-clang-format accidentally
indented it by two spaces.
Merge branch 'homar-typo' into 'main'2024-02-20T08:29:06ZJulian Andres Klodejak@debian.org2024-02-20T08:29:06Zurn:sha1:33c2f0fe5b9ec1c368a7f377de5632f183b12e12
Typos in integration tests
See merge request apt-team/apt!313Show a separate list of upgrades deferred due to phasing2024-02-13T14:08:57ZJulian Andres Klodejulian.klode@canonical.com2024-02-13T11:54:07Zurn:sha1:1a0882558da05eaf471c2b4049ae27305e7c70ec
This introduces a new line:
The following upgrades have been deferred due to phasing
This is any kept back package that is also phasing. This may
not be 100% accurate as we have kept it back due to other reasons
in an install command, for example, but we don't track for which
packages we applied phasing in reality.
If additional packages are kept back that are not phasing, show
a a notice
"N: Some packages may have been kept back due to phasing."
LP: #1988819
Add the ?security pattern2024-02-13T13:28:06ZJulian Andres Klodejulian.klode@canonical.com2024-02-13T11:33:51Zurn:sha1:82f4cfc971ef6a2e56b34227d9e0b1a594dc2265Add a new ?phasing pattern2024-02-13T13:28:06ZJulian Andres Klodejulian.klode@canonical.com2024-02-13T11:29:28Zurn:sha1:422e68f569f374f697b84332f7e68c6fe5f7389f
This selects all packages that are being kept back due to phasing
on your system.
For phasing, check if current version is a security update, not just previous ones2024-02-13T13:13:56ZJulian Andres Klodejulian.klode@canonical.com2024-02-13T12:58:40Zurn:sha1:26e0e9b76fb06afe5250eeb8e5b3d069d4793432
We only considered an update a security update if a previous update
is a security update but not the update in question itself.
LP: #2051181
Accept file system disorder in test-ignored-files2024-01-10T11:06:23ZDavid Kalnischkiesdavid@kalnischkies.de2024-01-10T10:48:51Zurn:sha1:d5cdd79bfb1b0dd1cadd878dad8273cbf7069dbb
Reading the contents of a directory is not deterministic, so if we
wanted a fixed order we would need to sort the reported errors, but
as we don't need any specific order lets just accept both possibilities.
Regression-of: 7b41275b9da31d6c87bbaa0c9115e224e47b15e1