summaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
path: root/apt-private/private-output.cc
diff options
context:
space:
mode:
authorJulian Andres Klode <julian.klode@canonical.com>2021-05-17 10:25:28 +0200
committerJulian Andres Klode <julian.klode@canonical.com>2021-05-17 10:25:28 +0200
commit81eb944c76d99f34b57d7c3efd283c3ffb6e4c1f (patch)
tree84a1eeb4daaa400ec06c46b03b5d51478fd50e7d /apt-private/private-output.cc
parent1be9dc63719f3a73df5ee7dea3119fab13a55239 (diff)
policy: Apply phasing to uninstalled packages too
If a package is not installed yet, we do need to apply phasing as we otherwise get into weird situations when installing packages: In the launchpad bug below, ubuntu-release-upgrader-core was installed, and hence the phasing for the upgrade to it was applied. However, ubuntu-release-upgrader-gtk was about to be installed - and hence the phasing did not apply, causing a version mismatch, because ubuntu-release-upgrader-gtk from -updates was used, but -core from release pocket. Sigh. An alternative approach to dealing with this issue could be to apply phasing to all packages within the same source package, which would work in most cases. However, there might be unforeseen side effects and it is of course possible to have = depends between source packages, such as -signed packages on the unsigned ones for bootloaders. This problem does not occur in the update-manager implementation of phased updates as update-manager only deals with upgrading packages, but does not install new packages and thus does not see that issue. APT however, has to apply phasing more broadly, as you can and often do install additional packages during upgrade, or upgrade packages during install commands, as both accept package list arguments and have the same code in the backend. LP: #1925745
Diffstat (limited to 'apt-private/private-output.cc')
0 files changed, 0 insertions, 0 deletions