On Fri, Nov 16, 2018 at 04:26:24PM -0500, Yaroslav Halchenko wrote: > and I guess I can demystify right away what is going on (although I > didn't try to reconfirm by rebuilding or debugging): > > https://salsa.debian.org/apt-team/apt/blob/master/apt-private/private-show.cc#L488 > > if (F.Flagged(pkgCache::Flag::NoPackages)) > continue; > > so no apt entries are displayed if they provide no packages ATM. > > Although I could see how it is useful generally, for our purpose it is > somewhat of a blow, since we are trying to use apt-cache policy output > to decide what APT sources in general are configured. and since we are > rolling back in time to use snapshots, they might have had packages at > that point in time, thus we better adjust them as well.
I don't know if it helps, but you might want to look at apt-get indextargets? > > Also documentation has no hint on such a "feature": > > policy [pkg...] > policy is meant to help debug issues relating to the preferences > file. With no > arguments it will print out the priorities of each source. > Otherwise it prints > out detailed information about the priority selection of the named > package. > > so "each source", but not each source is printed out! > > I wish this "feature" of skipping APT sources without packages was somehow > optional/configurable. Otherwise, at least documentation should mention such > feature. I don't necessarily see it as skipping sources. I don't think the Packages files for these sources exist in the cache (as none are downloaded), hence they won't be shown. Clearly source is not a particularly helpful term, as it's a bit vague (it's not a sources.list entry, after all). I think it should probably say "non-empty Packages index" or something. -- debian developer - deb.li/jak | jak-linux.org - free software dev ubuntu core developer i speak de, en
