Do not install aptitude 0.4.4-4b+1!

News and discussion about development of the Debian OS itself

Do not install aptitude 0.4.4-4b+1!

Postby rickh » 2007-07-27 02:58

From the blog of Daniel Burrows: picked up from Debian Planet.

Do not install aptitude 0.4.4-4b+1!

Apparently someone decided to resolve the dependency problems with aptitude in unstable by doing a blind recompile and NMU of the package, presumably because of my horrible laziness in not doing an upload to unstable yet. The problem, as I wrote in the bug reports regarding the need for a recompile, is that this produces a package that's totally unusable, which is why I didn't do it myself. If you are running unstable, you should either not upgrade the apt system, or install the experimental aptitude ... These packages are not perfectly stable, but they also aren't totally unusable.

I apologize for the inconvenience -- if I can get some time this evening I'll rebuild the aptitude in experimental and throw it kicking and screaming into unstable.
Debian-Lenny/Sid 32/64
Desktop: Generic Core 2 Duo, EVGA 680i, Nvidia
Laptop: Generic Intel SIS/AC97
User avatar
rickh
 
Posts: 3473
Joined: 2006-06-29 02:13
Location: Albuquerque, NM USA

Postby llivv » 2007-07-27 04:19

'
Last edited by llivv on 2019-02-16 05:46, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
llivv
 
Posts: 5488
Joined: 2007-02-14 18:10
Location: cold storage

Postby llivv » 2007-07-27 04:33

'
Last edited by llivv on 2019-02-16 05:46, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
llivv
 
Posts: 5488
Joined: 2007-02-14 18:10
Location: cold storage

Postby Telemachus » 2007-07-27 11:33

Am I missing something? The Burrows blog post is dated July 1st, and the current version of Aptitude in Lenny is 0.4.5.4-1. So there's no question of installing 0.4.4-4b+1 in Testing, much less in Unstable or Experimental. (The Sid version is 0.4.6.1-1.) Whatever problem with compiling that blog mentions would have been long solved by now, wouldn't it?

A few minutes with bugs.debian.org shows that the critical problems with 0.4.4 have been fixed already in 0.4.5. I'm not saying that they're aren't outstanding bugs against Aptitude, but that doesn't worry me. Bugs are normal. The only program without bugs is non-functioning.
User avatar
Telemachus
 
Posts: 4677
Joined: 2006-12-25 15:53

Postby mzilikazi » 2007-07-27 13:23

I'm using aptitude 0.4.6.1-1 w/ no apparent problems. There is no version of aptitude in experimental at this time.
Debian Sid Laptops:
AMD Athlon(tm) 64 X2 Dual-Core Processor TK-55 / 1.5G
Intel(R) Pentium(R) Dual CPU T2390 @ 1.86GHz / 3G
User avatar
mzilikazi
Forum Ninja
 
Posts: 3321
Joined: 2004-09-16 02:14
Location: Colorado Springs, CO

Postby llivv » 2007-07-27 13:39

'
Last edited by llivv on 2019-02-16 05:46, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
llivv
 
Posts: 5488
Joined: 2007-02-14 18:10
Location: cold storage

Postby Telemachus » 2007-07-27 13:55

Llivv wrote:I don't want to chance things ATM by installing anything until I know more about what I'm doing with the damned thing.

If you don't want to update, no problem. It's your system. But I guess what I was saying is that there are always some bugs, You are unlikely to get many perfectly clean, bug-free installs. Even Etch still has some bugs, and it's obviously the most stable Debian branch at the moment. (Btw, if you want stability that much, why not use Etch or Etch + Backports for newer programs?)
User avatar
Telemachus
 
Posts: 4677
Joined: 2006-12-25 15:53

Postby rickh » 2007-07-27 15:10

Am I missing something? The Burrows blog post is dated July 1st, and the current version of Aptitude in Lenny is 0.4.5.4-1.


Sorry. Overreaction and lack of investigation on my part. This item just showed up on Debian Planet yesterday, and I assumed, without checking, that it was current.
Debian-Lenny/Sid 32/64
Desktop: Generic Core 2 Duo, EVGA 680i, Nvidia
Laptop: Generic Intel SIS/AC97
User avatar
rickh
 
Posts: 3473
Joined: 2006-06-29 02:13
Location: Albuquerque, NM USA

Postby Telemachus » 2007-07-27 15:21

rickh wrote:Sorry. Overreaction and lack of investigation on my part. This item just showed up on Debian Planet yesterday, and I assumed, without checking, that it was current.

No worries. Better to be warned and not need it than to need it and not be warned.
User avatar
Telemachus
 
Posts: 4677
Joined: 2006-12-25 15:53

Postby plugwash » 2007-07-28 16:29

llivv wrote:linux-libc-dev ( has 2 bugs) and
gcc-4.1 (has 1 bug)

Every time I try to work around the broken packge issues that show up, either some other package breaks or the list of bugs is just to high for me to justify installing.

lets take a closer look at those bugs

#429064: linux-libc-dev: <linux/types.h> conflicts with <sys/ustat.h>
causes build failures on a couple of packages but unless you are working on developing those it shouldn't cause you any problems
#434040: libdebian-installer: type declaration conflict
another bug regarding a build failure with one package
#416001 gcj-4.1: does not build with apt-src
do you really urgently need to rebuild gcj?!

Not all rc bugs are equal, a bug can be rc because it causes one package to ftbfs on one obscure architecture (a ftbfs bug is rc for reasons that should be obvious to anyone who understands the point of open source but it is not an immediate problem for most end users).

Sometimes things jam up to the point that the release team have to allow some "rc" bugs into testing to allow fixes for other more important ones to propogate. Especially in the case where libraries have had a shlibs bump.
plugwash
 
Posts: 2508
Joined: 2006-09-17 01:10


Return to Debian Development

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests

fashionable