Age | Commit message (Collapse) | Author |
|
Everything's working now.
|
|
We used to read the Release file for each Packages file and store the
data in the PackageFile struct even through potentially many Packages
(and Translation-*) files could use the same data. The point of the
exercise isn't the duplicated data through. Having the Release files as
first-class citizens in the Cache allows us to properly track their
state as well as allows us to use the information also for files which
aren't in the cache, but where we know to which Release file they
belong (Sources are an example for this).
This modifies the pkgCache structs, especially the PackagesFile struct
which depending on how libapt users access the data in these structs can
mean huge breakage or no visible change. As a single data point:
aptitude seems to be fine with this. Even if there is breakage it is
trivial to fix in a backportable way while avoiding breakage for
everyone would be a huge pain for us.
Note that not all PackageFile structs have a corresponding ReleaseFile.
In particular the dpkg/status file as well as *.deb files have not. As
these have only a Archive property need, the Component property takes
over this duty and the ReleaseFile remains zero. This is also the reason
why it isn't needed nor particularily recommended to change from
PackagesFile to ReleaseFile blindly. Sticking with the earlier is
usually the better option.
|
|
It is a rather strange sight that index items use SiteOnly which strips
the Path, while e.g. deb files are downloaded with NoUserPassword which
does not. Important to note here is that for the file transport Path is
pretty important as there is no Host which would be displayed by Site,
which always resulted in "interesting" unspecific errors for "file:".
Adding a 'middle' ground between the two which does show the Path but
potentially modifies it (it strips a pending / at the end if existing)
solves this "file:" issue, syncs the output and in the end helps to
identify which file is meant exactly in progress output and co as a
single site can have multiple repositories in different paths.
|
|
The documentation says this, but the code only agreed while evaluating
specific packages, but not generics. These needed a pin above 1000 to
have the same effect.
The code causing this makes references to a 'second pesduo status file',
but nowhere is explained what this might stand for and/or what it was,
so we do the only reasonable thing: Remove all references and do as
documented.
|
|
We use test{success,failure} now all over the place in the framework, so
its only consequencial to do this in the situations in which we test for
a specific output as well.
Git-Dch: Ignore
|
|
The configuration key Acquire::AllowInsecureRepositories controls if
apt allows loading of unsigned repositories at all.
The configuration Acquire::AllowDowngradeToInsecureRepositories
controls if a signed repository can ever become unsigned. This
should really never be needed but we provide it to avoid having
to mess around in /var/lib/apt/lists if there is a use-case for
this (which I can't think of right now).
|
|
|
|
For many commands the output isn't stable (like then dpkg is called) but
the exitcode is, so this helper enhances the common && msgpass ||
msgfail by generating automatically a msgtest and showing the output of
the command in case of failure instead of discarding it unconditionally,
the later being chronic-like behaviour
Git-Dch: Ignore
|
|
if the archive is signed, but the signature can't be checked
as the key is missing (debbugs #597301 - fix in r2105)
|
|
invalid in most cases anyway
|
|
funtions (bash complains)
|
|
- support 100-pinning in Release file with ButAutomaticUpgrades
as requested by the backports crew (Closes: #596097)
* apt-pkg/deb/deblistparser.cc:
- overrule NotAutomatic in case of ButAutomaticUpgrades
|