On Wed, Dec 08, 2010 at 09:19:44PM +0200, Modestas Vainius wrote: > On trečiadienis 08 Gruodis 2010 13:06:23 Roger Leigh wrote: > > > > Ok, the latter is because you removed a key option (that I added some > > > > time ago) from aptitude command line in > > > > 80f811184d7c7b06a6a5ec8d646b1eac015dffa2. That's: > > > > > > > > '-o', "Aptitude::ProblemResolver::Hints::KeepDummy=reject > > > > $dummy_pkg_name > > > > > > > > :UNINST", > > > > > > I removed this because it no longer seemed necessary when installing > > > the package directly from a local archive. It shouldn't be a > > > candidate for removal if we explicitly asked for its installation? > > > > The patch I attached in my other mail should solve all the other > > issues. > > > > - dummy packages are created correctly > > - local archive created correctly > > - archive signing key created correctly > > - archive signed correctly > > - dummy packages install from archive correctly > > > > I'll add back the above aptitude option if it's still required, but if > > you could test the attached patch and let me know if there are any > > remaining problems, that would be great. > > /tmp is fixed and sbuild now tells me when it is generating a key (which is > good). But now I have another nitpick. The new way of installing dependencies > means that `apt-get update` is run twice (once for core-dummy and once for > package-dummy). This might not be always desirable (e.g. when rebuilding the > package repeatedly from the same aptcache). Also, --apt-update option became > redundant, didn't it?
Certainly for the apt and aptitude resolvers; for the internal resolver, it's still useful. Is it possible to request an update of specific archive components, so that we don't need to do a complete fetch of everything? If we could update the local archive only, that would be ideal. > > If you still find this option > > is required for correct functioning, I'll add it back. > > It is necessary, see below. OK, thanks for the explanation. I've added this back. Thanks, Roger -- .''`. Roger Leigh : :' : Debian GNU/Linux http://people.debian.org/~rleigh/ `. `' Printing on GNU/Linux? http://gutenprint.sourceforge.net/ `- GPG Public Key: 0x25BFB848 Please GPG sign your mail.
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature