Hi,

Raphael Hertzog wrote:

> 1/ It concerns packages which have not been touched since 2004 or packages
> which were installed before 2004 and got removed but not purged since then

I did say "ideally".  I can understand if you're not motivated to work
on it.

(That said, iiuc the above is not so rare of a usage pattern.  Some
people never purge packages until they have to, to save some trouble
reconfiguring when it is time to install again later.)

> 2/ We can't invent the value to put in Architecture

It seems likely this has been covered before, but just in case: why
not put in the native architecture for already-installed, ancient
packages?

If I am reading the multiarch spec correctly, i386 packages cannot
satisfy dependencies from amd64 packages without a "Multiarch" field,
and i386 packages are not co-installable with other packages of the
same name without a "Multiarch" field.  So although this would be
technically inaccurate (some of the ancient packages were presumably
Architecture: all), I think it should be safe.

> dselect update sometimes does depending on the "method" configured.
>
> Right now, it serves no purpose for apt-get to update the available file.

Actually I'm a bit puzzled by the behavior.  sync-available (from
dctrl-tools) and the apt method's "update" script call
"apt-cache dumpavail" to write a new available file and
"dpkg --update-avail" to use it, ignoring the old one.  So why are
people needing to run "dpkg --clear-avail"?

Would it be possible in the long term for dpkg to stop caring about
"available" altogether (leaving it to dselect)?

>> Especially for the sake of cross-upgrade support, the architecture
>> field seems kind of important.
>
> Which is why we're requiring it now and why we're more verbose.

Yes, and thanks for that.  Without a warning to point out these old
package records, it would be a lot harder to figure out what to do
about them.



-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org

Reply via email to