On Wed, Oct 01, 2008 at 09:39:04AM +0200, Ferenc Wagner wrote: > Christian Perrier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > Quoting Ferenc Wagner ([EMAIL PROTECTED]): > >> (Either you didn't Cc: me or the message got lost; it's a pity: we > >> pretty much wasted a week...) > > > > As far as I have seen, noone follwoed up to your mail. > > Oh no, Michael Vogt did, it's in the BTS. It's just I didn't get a > personal notification, so it went unnoticed for quite some time.
Thanks for the patch, while it certainly fixes the problem I think its not ideal because it adds a check into the generic layer of libapt against a "APT::Get" config item (that is the namespace of apt-get). I attached a alternative solution that move the state file writing into dpkgpm.cc instead. Its is a problem for packages that reimplement pkgDPkgPM::Go() (I doubt that anyone is doing that). > > Sad, but that's how APT maintenance is done right now. > > Is there any particular reason for that? APT is installed on every > single Debian system... Is it the responsibility? Or rather the > complexity? Just curious. This is currently discussed in another thread. I have no good answer, but I think "not enough time" is a important issue. Help is certainly welcome. Cheers, Michael -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
