Package: apt Version: 0.9.9 Severity: normal Tags: patch User: ubuntu-de...@lists.ubuntu.com Usertags: origin-ubuntu ubuntu-patch saucy
I noticed my cross-building environments misbehaving as of apt 0.9.9. Specifically, they sometimes choose packages of the wrong architecture. Here's an example. Install ubuntu-dev-tools, unpack http://people.canonical.com/~cjwatson/tmp/saucy-amd64-arm64-apt-bug.tar.gz in ~/.chdist/ (it will unpack to a single saucy-amd64-arm64-apt-bug/ subdirectory), adjust the paths in ~/.chdist/saucy-amd64-arm64-apt-bug/etc/apt/apt.conf, and run "chdist apt-get saucy-amd64-arm64-apt-bug install autoconf". You will see it installing m4:arm64, which is clearly incorrect: the primary architecture is amd64, m4 is Multi-Arch: foreign, and in any case I'm not asking for anything from arm64 to be installed so there's no reason apt should reach for the foreign architecture. The problem here is that the Priority field in one of the Packages files is incorrect due to a mishap with reprepro configuration, which you can see if you run "grep-dctrl -PX m4 ~/.chdist/saucy-amd64-arm64-apt-bug/var/lib/apt/lists/*_Packages": the amd64 version is Priority: standard but the arm64 version is Priority: optional (and has a stray "optional: interpreters" field). I've asked the maintainer of the repository in question to fix it up. However, Priority is a rather weak property of a package because it's typically applied via overrides, and it's easy for maintainers of third-party repositories to misconfigure them so that overrides aren't applied correctly. It shouldn't be ranked ahead of choosing packages from the native architecture. In this case, I have no user-mode emulation for arm64 set up, so choosing m4:arm64 simply won't work. Here's a patch. diff --git a/apt-pkg/depcache.cc b/apt-pkg/depcache.cc index 2c6eb43..978a893 100644 --- a/apt-pkg/depcache.cc +++ b/apt-pkg/depcache.cc @@ -1007,9 +1007,6 @@ struct CompareProviders { else if ((B->Flags & pkgCache::Flag::Important) == pkgCache::Flag::Important) return true; } - // higher priority seems like a good idea - if (AV->Priority != BV->Priority) - return AV->Priority > BV->Priority; // prefer native architecture if (strcmp(A.Arch(), B.Arch()) != 0) { @@ -1024,6 +1021,9 @@ struct CompareProviders { else if (*a == B.Arch()) return true; } + // higher priority seems like a good idea + if (AV->Priority != BV->Priority) + return AV->Priority > BV->Priority; // unable to decide… return A->ID < B->ID; } Thanks, -- Colin Watson [cjwat...@ubuntu.com] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
