Am Fri, Apr 18, 2025 at 11:30:12AM +0200, schrieb Laurent Bigonville: > > The interesting thing to discover now is what happened in these 24 hours > > on your system that lists/ got a new Release file (or, well InRelease), > > but not new indexes… unsurprisingly that shouldn't happen, but so far > > nobody has provided any leads as people notice only after the fact and > > at that point any debugging is pointless. > > It's a laptop with a desktop environment and PackageKit is installed, not > sure whether PK could impact this. Also the laptop has been probably > restarted in between so that means that PK has restarted and probably tried > to update the indexes.
Well, while all front ends do share code and logic via libapt, there is always the possibility of the front end holding it wrong. And there is never an easy tell which config they are using. (At least I don't know…) Anecdotal evidence suggests its some front end as I don't use any and don't have that problem, while initial reporter here claim they have it only on one system – while all likely have apt installed, so a general problem would appear in general… of course, that is a rather weak approach especially as this is both usually a silent issue and a self-healing one, but its all we have so far… Or if you will: +moreinfo +unreproducible. > > > severity 1078608 serious > > Not that it makes any practical difference in the apt team if you tag > > it wishlist or critical, but I am curious: Which section in the Debian > > policy is apt violating here? Or have I just missed you joining the > > apt team and/or Debian Release team? > > (Seehttps://www.debian.org/Bugs/Developer#severities) > > Some maintainers can get really angry if you use the wrong severities, > > so ideally, next time, you should give a justification at least. > > Serious severity is: > > > is a severe violation of Debian policy (roughly, it violates a > > "must" or "required" directive), or, in the package maintainer's > > or release manager's opinion, makes the package unsuitable for > > release. > > In my opinion, having trouble to update a system makes apt "unsuitable for > release". And marking it "serious" makes this visible to the release manager > team. If I tagged every bug serious I thought makes something unsuitable for release or that I want other people to look at… but as you quoted my own opinion is irrelevant for the label 'serious' by design and it shouldn't be misused as "summoning magic" either… Tag it 'grave' if that is your reasoning (and it makes you feel better), but as already said at least here it doesn't really matter as we have a 1000+ open bugs against apt at least someone believes is serious in their opinion. Does it change anything? Nope. All it really does is that testers upgrading from stable will be scared by apt-listbugs in a sense having probably more negative impact on the release than this bug seems to be able to. In exchange, no magic army of coders appears that fixes bugs nor does anyone provide any meaningful details based on severity. For all we know, as we know nothing, apt/oldstable has that problem, too, (assuming of course its an apt problem to begin with) making that even more ironic. But it makes you feel better and I don't really care, so its fine. I was indeed just giving you a hint for next time on another package to include a justification rather than treat it as "obviously so". Best regards David Kalnischkies
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
