| Age | Commit message (Collapse) | Author |
|---|
|
This allows to differentiate properly between 'apt-get upgrade', 'apt
upgrade' and 'apt full-upgrade'.
|
|
apt/apt-pkg/edsp.cc: In function ‘bool EDSP::WriteLimitedScenario(pkgDepCache&, FILE*, const PackageSet&, OpProgress*)’:
apt/apt-pkg/edsp.cc:245:56: warning: cannot optimize loop, the loop counter may overflow [-Wunsafe-loop-optimizations]
std::string dependencies[pkgCache::Dep::Enhances + 1];
^
Using a std::array to silence gcc as well as as a code improvement feels right here.
Git-Dch: Ignore
|
|
|
|
The &= introduced in the EDSP-FileFd conversion isn't working to full
satisfaction for multiple && clauses as the && has a higher binding than
&= has, so that the methods were called even through they shouldn't
have because of previous errors. Using variadic functions we can solve
this in a slightly cleaner way bringing down the amount of 'broken pipe'
errors for the error case of the dump resolver substantially.
Git-Dch: Ignore
|
|
I doubt there is any non-src:apt usage of these interfaces.
|
|
The report mentions "apt list --upgradable", but there are others which
have inconsistent behavior ranging from segfaulting to doing something
with the partial (and hence incomplete) data. We had a recent report
about sources.list (#818628), this one mentions prefences, the obvious
next step is conf files… so the testcase is adapted to check for all
three in file and directory versions and run a bunch of commands each
time which should all have more or less the same behavior in such a case
(aka error out).
Closes: 824503
|
|
Closes: 824702
|
|
--show-upgraded is the default since
906fbf8886926eeb302332d997c9bd861291e155 so documenting it as if it
would be an option having an effect as is feels wrong and we do the same
for other options like install-recomends, download, …, too.
This commit also removes -u from the documentation, but still supports
it in the commandline parsing. Eventually we should deprecate the short
option, but for now lets just stop documenting it.
Closes: 824456
|
|
This commit moves the creation of the fetcher and with it the
calculation of the filenames before the code generation the various
lists detailing the solution. This means that simulation comes even so
slightly closer to a real run as it will require and parse the package
indexes for filenames and queuing of URIs, so that a simulation "using"
an unavailable download method actually fails now.
The real benefit of this change is through that the rather special but
nontheless handy --no-download --fix-missing mode now actually shows
what the solution is it will apply to the system rather than the
solution it would if it could download all not-downloaded packages.
|
|
Errors cause a kind of automatic no already, but warnings and notices
are only displayed at the end of the apt execution even through they
could effect the choice of saying yes/no to questions: E.g. if a
configuration (file) was ignored you wanted to have an effect or if an
external solver you used generated warnings suggesting that the solution
might be valid, but bogus non-the-less and similar things.
Note that this only moves those messages up to the question if the
answer is interactive – not if e.g. -y is used or no question is asked at
all so this has an effect only on interactive usage of apt(-get), not
script who might be parsing apt output.
|
|
This fixes comparisons where either the stored or the input string
have a trailing comma.
|
|
This hopefully makes debugging things easier.
|
|
The rest is also on the same line, so let's go consistent here
now that we have a bug report about it.
LP: #1581985
|
|
|
|
This fixes Debian/apt#13 and the launchpad bug listed below,
but is far more advanced. I went through private-cmndline.cc
and looked at the supported options.
LP: #1573547
Thanks: Elias Fröhner and Svyatoslav Gryaznov for the initial work
|
|
Unexpected are for examples removal requests for versions which aren't
installed, installations of already installed versions & requests to
install and remove a package at the same time.
|
|
Document that package identifiers must be unique (apt only uses the last
action for a given identifier) and that install requests do also imply
upgrades and downgrades (and thus removal of the old version). This is
to prevent that solvers express an upgrade or downgrade instruction as
two stanzas: a removal of the old version and an installation of the new
version. Instead, a single install stanza is sufficient to express
upgrade or downgrade requests.
|
|
|
|
Closes: 823976
|
|
The spec was slightly inconsistent if the preferences setting is
available only as generic or specific setting & the code only supported
the specific one, while for the strict-pinning was only generic…
As the usual pattern for apt is to have both options we adapt the spec
and code to support both as well.
This also adds a purely informal "Solver" field so in case the request
is saved in a file, we know to which solver the sent preferences apply.
Closes: 823918
|
|
Failures can happen and APT regardless will do a partial cache
update anyway. Because APT ensures that the list directory is
in a sane state, it makes sense to also call success hooks if
success was only partial - otherwise it loses sync with APT.
Most importantly, this causes the appstream cache to be empty,
see launchpad bug #1562733.
This is somewhat overly optimistic though: As soon as any repository
has nonexisting optional files, the missing optional files are also
treated as success, which means a single broken repository without an
InRelease file still runs Success hooks, even though it really should
not.
|
|
This prevented some sources.list entries from working, an example
of which can be found in the test.
|
|
Improve GetLocalitySortedVersionSet, speeds up apt search by 30%
|
|
Versions which are only available in dpkg/status aren't installable and
apt doesn't pick them as candidate for this reason – for the same reason
such packages shouldn't be sent to an external solver via EDSP. The
packages are pinned to -1, but if the solver has strict pinning disabled
it could end up picking this version anyhow – which is a request apt can
not satisfy.
Reported-By: Maximiliano Curia <maxy@debian.org> on IRC
|
|
|
|
gpg doesn't give use a UID on NODATA, which we were "expecting" (but not
using for anything), but just an error number. Instead of collecting
these as badsigners which will trigger a "invald signature" error with
remarks like "NODATA 1" we instead adapt a message similar to the NODATA
error of a clearsigned file (which is actually not reached anymore as we
split them up, which fails with a NOSPLIT error, which uses the same
general error message).
In other words: Not a security relevant change, just a user experience
improvement as we now point them to the most likely cause of the
problem instead of saying "invalid signature" which would point them in
the direction of the archive being broken (for everyone) instead.
Closes: 823746
|
|
A frontend like apt-file is only interested in a specific set of files
and selects those easily via "Created-By". If it supports two locations
for those files through it would need to select both and a user would
need to know that implementation detail for sources.list configuration.
The "Identifier" field is hence introduced which by default has the same
value as "Created-By", but can be freely configured – especially it can
be used to give two indexes the same identifier.
|
|
Sometimes index files are in different locations in a repository as it
is currently the case for Contents files which are per-component in
Debian, but aren't in Ubuntu. This has historic reasons and is perhaps
changed soon, but such cases of transitions can always happen in the
future again, so we should prepare:
Introduced is a new field declaring that the current item should only be
downloaded if the mentioned item wasn't allowing for transitions without
a flagday in clients and archives.
This isn't implemented 'simpler' with multiple MetaKeys as items (could)
change their descriptions and perhaps also other configuration bits with
their location.
|
|
It looks a bit strange on the outside to have multiple "native
architecture", but all is considered an implementation detail and e.g.
packages of arch:all are in dependency resolution equal to native
packages.
|
|
We don't have to initialize the Release files with a set of IndexTargets
to acquire, but instead wait for the Release file to be acquired and
only then ask which IndexTargets to get.
Git-Dch: Ignore
|
|
Progress reporting used an "upper bound" on files we might get, expect
that this wasn't correct in case pdiff entered the picture. So instead
of calculating a value which is perhaps incorrect, we just accept that
we can't tell how many files we are going to download and just keep at
0% until we know. Additionally, if we have pdiffs we wait until we got
these (sub)index files, too.
That could all be done better by downloading all Release files first and
planing with them in hand accordingly, but one step at a time.
|
|
The code naturally evolved from a TransactionManager optional to a
required setup which resulted in various places doing unneeded checks
suggesting a more complicated setup than is actually needed.
Git-Dch: Ignore
|
|
Commit 9b8034a9fd40b4d05075fda719e61f6eb4c45678 just deals with
InRelease properly and generates broken URIs in case the mirror (or the
achieve really) has no InRelease file.
[As this was in no released version no need to clutter changelog with a
fix notice.]
Git-Dch: Ignore
|
|
Most tests just need a signed repository and don't care if it signed by
an InRelease file or a Release.gpg file, so we can save some time by
just generating one of them by default.
Sounds like not much, but quickly adds up to a few seconds with the
amount of tests we have accumulated by now.
Git-Dch: Ignore
|
|
If the test just signs release files to throw away one of them to test
the other, we can just as well save the time and not create it.
Git-Dch: Ignore
|
|
Always those silly mistakes. Do what I mean, not what I said…
Reported-By: Travis
Git-Dch: Ignore
|
|
Broken in a4b8112b19763cbd2c12b81d55bc7d43a591d610.
If an item has a description which includes no space and is redirected
to another mirror the code which wants to rewrite the description
expects a space in there, but can't find it and the unguarded substr
command on the string will fail with an exception thrown…
Guarding it properly and everything is fine.
|
|
dpkg can optionally colorize its output since 1.18.5. Currently this
defaults to 'never', but it will eventually be 'auto'. It seems
reasonable to assume that a user who has enabled/disabled colors in apt
will want to have dpkg have the same state regarding color usage.
This isn't overriding explicit settings by the user, so in case a user
feels strongly about it one way or the other there are options.
|
|
The actual reason for this commit isn't the limit – there isn't much
point in using that much nesting – its in shutting up gcc mostly:
apt/apt-pkg/contrib/configuration.cc: In function ‘bool ReadConfigFile(Configuration&, const string&, const bool&, const unsigned int&)’:
apt/apt-pkg/contrib/configuration.cc:686:20: warning: cannot optimize loop, the loop counter may overflow [-Wunsafe-loop-optimizations]
string Stack[100];
^
by replacing this with C++s handy std::stack container (adapter).
Also cleans some whitespace noise from the file in the process.
|
|
Guarding against 'broken' greps not dealing with non-text inputs
"just in case" by making the input text with a proper newline.
[commit message by David Kalnischkies]
Reported-On: IRC
Git-Dch: Ignore
|
|
We want to stop hard-depending on gnupg and for this it is essential
that apt-key isn't used in any critical execution path, which
maintainerscript are. Especially as it is likely that these script call
apt-key either only for (potentially now outdated cleanup) or still not
use the much simpler trusted.gpg.d infrastructure.
|
|
apt doesn't need gnupg in its main execution paths to function,
especially the Release file verification is done with gpgv only.
It is only used by apt-key for advanced key management functionality
most user will never use nor need.
The intend is to demote it eventually to Suggests, but we opt here for a
staged downgrade as there are still third-party repositories out there
which require apt-key functionality without depending on gnupg (or apt
for that matter).
|
|
|
|
|
|
Closes: 820861
|
|
Users have the option since apt >= 1.1 to enforce that a Release file is
signed with specific key(s) either via keyring filename or fingerprints.
This commit adds an entry with the same name and value (except that it
doesn't accept filenames for obvious reasons) to the Release file so
that the repository owner can set a default value for this setting
effecting the *next* Release file, not the current one, which provides a
functionality similar "HTTP Public Key Pinning". The pinning is in
effect as long as the (then old) Release file is considered valid, but
it is also ignored if the Release file has no Valid-Until at all.
|
|
A keyring file can include multiple keys, so its only fair for
transitions and such to support multiple fingerprints as well.
|
|
We parse the messages we receive into two big categories: Most of the
messages have a keyid as well as a userid and as they are errors we want
to show the userids as well. The other category is also errors, but have
no userid (like NO_PUBKEY). Explicitly expressing this in code should
make it a bit easier to look at and it also help in dropping additional
fields or just the newline at the end consistently.
Git-Dch: Ignore
|
|
Daniel Kahn Gillmor highlights in the bugreport that security isn't
improving by having the user import additional keys – especially as
importing keys securely is hard.
The bugreport was initially about dropping the warning to a notice, but
in given the previously mentioned observation and the fact that we
weren't printing a warning (or a notice) for expired or revoked keys
providing a signature we drop it completely as the code to display a
message if this was the only key is in another path – and is considered
critical.
Closes: 618445
|
|
Signatures on data can have an expiration date, too, which we hadn't
handled previously explicitly (no problem – gpg still has a non-zero
exit code so apt notices the invalid signature) so the error message
wasn't as helpful as it could be (aka mentioning the key signing it).
|
