hat already if installed by d-i, so that
is probably for the best for consistency alone.
In any case, I will leave d-i folks have fun with this now,
but feel free to ask apt-team if there is something we can help with.
Best regards
David Kalnischkies
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
help not installing broken packages (but that is another
topic).
So, who is gonna take the blame for deciding this for everyone?
Best regards
David Kalnischkies
[0]
https://salsa.debian.org/apt-team/apt/-/blob/main/apt-private/private-update.cc#L88-106
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
basename somehow to figure out the name, but I feel that this
> would be a little surprising.
We haven't figured out a sensible scheme for file naming either which
was one more reason to not try to make 'apt-key add' work without gpg.
Best regards
David Kalnischkies
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
empty. We also can't
look if the Release file contains any file for this component as we
don't really know what is the component in the filepath:
"main/debian-installer/some/file" might be from the component "main",
"main/debian-installer" or "main/debian-installer/some".
As said, I am not sure. In the end reassigning to ftpmaster might be the
best option, but I am open for other opinions.
Best regards
David Kalnischkies
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
epositories with custom d-i
> > configuration, so I'm fine with people having broken stuff because they
> > pasted a whole mail…
>
> agreed, we can expect these folks to get the details right.
For the same reason I wouldn't worry too much about people using *.asc
files with binary format contents and vice versa to be honest.
Best regards
David Kalnischkies
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
ckports. I am just responding to calls to deity(@). ;)
The best "fruits" for me in this thread were actually the private
replies I got, which I haven't answered as I don't really know what to
say, but still are very grateful for as even after all things said in
public I actually ended up labeling this experience as good, which
I hadn't even considered a potential outcome initially.
So, thanks a lot!
Best regards
David Kalnischkies
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
On Tue, Dec 01, 2015 at 05:00:47PM +0100, Rhonda D'Vine wrote:
> * David Kalnischkies <da...@kalnischkies.de> [2015-11-30 22:22:08 CET]:
> > In other words: If you have experimental sources on your stable system,
> > packages new in experimental will be automat
(see the other mail for more on this topic and also hopefully as
a clearup of what was meant initially; just picking some semi-unique
element here)
On Tue, Dec 01, 2015 at 03:39:25PM +0100, Philip Hands wrote:
> David Kalnischkies <da...@kalnischkies.de> writes:
> > P
ut
if apt would hide this choice behind an error I would just get the
impression that the system is making this needlessly difficult – after
all, far more dangerous solutions like removing the entire desktop
environment is purposed without additional loop to jump through, too]
Best regards
David Kalnischkies
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
" to reinstall all
> packages I've built seems to fix the issue.
As mentioned briefly schroot copies users & groups from your host
system, so if your host system has no _apt user, the _apt user in your
schroot will "disappear" next time it is copied over.
Best regards
David Kalnischkies
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
ege dropping for the moment.
Best regards
David Kalnischkies
diff --git a/apt-pkg/contrib/fileutl.cc b/apt-pkg/contrib/fileutl.cc
index 46de634..f754b31 100644
--- a/apt-pkg/contrib/fileutl.cc
+++ b/apt-pkg/contrib/fileutl.cc
@@ -2322,12 +2322,17 @@ bool DropPrivileges() /*{{{*/
return _
volunteer feel free to contact me (or better
yet deity@) and we will do what we can to help you out; I just want to
make cristal clear that we don't have the resources to do it ourselves).
Best regards
David Kalnischkies
¹ well, we have a testcase which works with cdrom sources which
obviously
, so
someone giving it a proper testspin would be nice, but if that is too
hard I guess Michael could just upload it and let the world test it for
us (now that he doesn't have to fear another security upload). ;)
Best regards
David Kalnischkies
commit 5afcfe2a51a9e47e95023b99bcab065d1975e950
Author
2010/8/26 Carsten Hey cars...@debian.org:
* David Kalnischkies [2010-08-26 17:43 +0200]:
Long story short:
If you want to get updates from an archive only if you pushed a version
previously from it: 100 = pin 500.
Wouldn't adding a new field to Release files similar to 'Not-Automatic
until this one or newer is in proper testing…
So, to let that actually work a user should not have a default-release…
Long story short:
If you want to get updates from an archive only if you pushed a version
previously from it: 100 = pin 500.
Best regards
David Kalnischkies
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE
15 matches
Mail list logo
