On 03.02.2011 22:30, Sven Joachim wrote: > On 2011-02-03 19:18 +0100, Eddy Petrișor wrote: > >> Francesco Poli a scris: >>> tag 611913 unreproducible >>> severity 611913 normal >>> thanks >>> >>> >>> On Thu, 03 Feb 2011 18:56:25 +0200 Eddy Petrișor wrote: >>> >>>> Subject: apt-listbugs: Breaks installation if removed and not purged >>>> Package: apt-listbugs >>>> Version: 0.0.90 >>>> Severity: critical >>>> Justification: breaks unrelated software >>> [...] >>>> Hello, >>> >>> Hi Eddy. >>> Thanks for your bug report! >>> >>>> I am aware that the 0.0.90 version is not in lenny nor in squeeze, >>>> but I've checked the faulty script and it has the same form in 0.0.89. >>>> >>>> The problem is that I have tried to remove apt-listbugs and after its >>>> removal all package manipulation fails with this message: >>>> >>>> /bin/sh: /usr/sbin/apt-listbugs: not found >>>> E: Sub-process /usr/sbin/apt-listbugs apt || exit 10 returned an error >>>> code (10) >>>> E: Failure running script /usr/sbin/apt-listbugs apt || exit 10 >>> >>> This problem should be fixed since apt-listbugs/0.0.77 (see changelog) >>> and I am not able to reproduce it. >>> >>> I've just tried the following in a sid chroot: >>> >>> # aptitude install apt-listbugs >>> [...] >>> # aptitude remove apt-listbugs >>> [...] >>> # ls /etc/apt/apt.conf.d/10apt-listbugs >>> ls: cannot access /etc/apt/apt.conf.d/10apt-listbugs: No such file or >>> directory >>> # ls /etc/apt/apt.conf.d/*listbugs* >>> /etc/apt/apt.conf.d/10apt-listbugs.disabled >>> # aptitude install apt-listbugs >>> [...] >>> # echo $? >>> 0 >> >> I think the problem is that aptitude caches these since I've seen >> aptitude fail even after modifying by hand the script. >> >> So the way to reproduce is probably install apt-listbugs and then remove it. > > I failed to reproduce this. However, there is a bug: if apt-listbugs is > in the "Config-Files" state and a to-be-installed new version fails to > unpack, you get into the situation you described.
Thanks for the involvement. My situation was encountered in the context of my attempt to upgrade to squeeze and finding that apt-listbugs was the only one thing keeping ruby around which was in itself an upgrade hell, so I decided to remove it. I had lost all hope of anybody reproducing the bug. > The postrm script should rename the file back to 10apt-listbugs.disabled > when called with the "abort-install" argument to take care of this > possibility, or maybe your patch should be applied, since renaming > conffiles in maintainer scripts looks rather fragile to me. This seems like a good idea, but, in addition to this, I still think the conffile should check for the existence of the command before calling it. It just makes sense to me. > Cheers, > Sven > -- Regards, EddyP ============================================= "Imagination is more important than knowledge" A.Einstein
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
