Debian Bug report logs - #468858
upgrades not properly handled (re: bash-completion)

Toggle useless messages

Message #5 received at submit@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Robert Millan <rmh@aybabtu.com>

To: Debian Bug Tracking System <submit@bugs.debian.org>

Subject: upgrades not properly handled (re: bash-completion)

Date: Sat, 01 Mar 2008 22:51:47 +0000

Package: bash
Version: 3.1dfsg-9
Severity: important

Upgrades from pre-bash-completion-split versions of bash aren't properly
handled.  bash should depend on bash-completion rather than recommending it,
at least untill lenny is released.  This is the normal way to ensure that
upgrading from last stable release doesn't cause regressions due to missing
functionality (in this case, breaking .bashrc scripts).

-- System Information:
Debian Release: lenny/sid
  APT prefers unstable
  APT policy: (500, 'unstable')
Architecture: amd64 (x86_64)

Kernel: Linux 2.6.18-6-amd64 (SMP w/2 CPU cores)
Locale: LANG=ca_AD.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=ca_AD.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8)
Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/bash

Versions of packages bash depends on:
ii  base-files                4.0.2          Debian base system miscellaneous f
ii  debianutils               2.28.3         Miscellaneous utilities specific t
ii  libc6                     2.7-6          GNU C Library: Shared libraries
ii  libncurses5               5.6+20080203-1 Shared libraries for terminal hand

Versions of packages bash recommends:
pn  bash-completion               <none>     (no description available)

-- no debconf information

Message #12 received at 468858@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: jidanni@jidanni.org

To: 468858@bugs.debian.org

Subject: for those who don't use completion

Date: Wed, 30 Apr 2008 10:05:23 +0800

All I know is running apt-get dselect-upgrade updates bash.
A subsequent run of dselect-upgrade installs bash-completion.
One then needs to do apt-get remove bash-completion if one does not
want it.
A subsequent run of dselect-upgrade at this point will install
nothing.

Therefore for those of us who don't want bash-completion installed,
one has to do the above routine each time one updates bash,
apparently.

As for the tangle of Replaces, Depends, Conflicts: too hard to read
for me.

version info:
bash:
  Installed: 3.2-2

(I also note the bash package depends on some curses stuff, extra
baggage for a pure batch environment (yes, rare.))

Message #17 received at 468858@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: jidanni@jidanni.org

To: 468858@bugs.debian.org, bash-completion@packages.debian.org

Cc: control@bugs.debian.org, 468858-submitter@bugs.debian.org

Subject: overly complex Depends doesn't afford removal of bash-completion

Date: Sun, 04 May 2008 08:40:01 +0800

reopen 468858
thanks
I'm reopening this in a hope you will re-engineer the bash Depends scheme.

Every time I do apt-get dist-upgrade, it installs bash-completion.
Every time I do apt-get dselect-upgrade, it removes bash-completion.
There is no other package that acts like this.
There is no orthodox way to keep bash-completion uninstalled.
No, I don't know why it does this from looking at apt-cache show bash,
too twisty for me to analyze.

Or just make it depend on bash-completion outright so there is no
choice for removal of bash-completion.

Message #23 received at 468858@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Robert Millan <rmh@aybabtu.com>

To: 468858@bugs.debian.org

Subject: wontfix

Date: Mon, 5 May 2008 10:32:56 +0200

tags 468858 - wontfix
thanks

Hi Matthias,

Please don't add a wontfix tag without explaining why.

Thank you

-- 
Robert Millan

<GPLv2> I know my rights; I want my phone call!
<DRM> What use is a phone call… if you are unable to speak?
(as seen on /.)

Message #28 received at 468858@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Robert Millan <rmh@aybabtu.com>

To: 468858@bugs.debian.org

Cc: Matthias Klose <doko@debian.org>

Subject: status of this bug

Date: Sat, 31 May 2008 13:25:25 +0200

To summarize what the current status of this bug is:

  - Users who install etch get bash completion as part of the default install
    (as part of bash package).

  - Users who install lenny get bash completion as part of the default install
    (via bash-completion package which is installed by tasksel).

  - Users who install etch and upgrade to lenny would preserve bash-completion
    functionality because of the Recommends in bash, _but_ apt in etch doesn't
    follow Recommends yet, so this only applies if they update apt first.

I think this shows clearly there's an unresolved transition here.  I understand
bash-completion shouldn't be Essential, but the process for moving it out isn't
being done properly.  It's not acceptable that end users get this functionality
silently disabled without any obvious explanation (they might not even know
which package provides it, or how).

My proposal is that in lenny, bash Depends on bash-completion, and for lenny+1
it moves it back to Recommends.

Matthias, if you still have an objection to this approach, please bring it up.

-- 
Robert Millan

<GPLv2> I know my rights; I want my phone call!
<DRM> What good is a phone call… if you are unable to speak?
(as seen on /.)

Message #31 received at 468858@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Robert Millan <rmh@aybabtu.com>

To: 468858@bugs.debian.org

Cc: Matthias Klose <doko@debian.org>, debian-ctte@lists.debian.org

Subject: assigning to tech ctte (Re: status of this bug)

Date: Tue, 3 Jun 2008 20:13:38 +0200

clone 468858 -1
reassign -1 tech-ctte
thanks

Dear Technical Committee,

Could you resolve this dispute?  Matthias has indicated that he disagrees by
adding the "wontfix" tag, but hasn't explained why (I expect he will now).

Notice that this problem only affects the etch->lenny transition.  Please
treat this urgently enough so that the change can be applied in time in case
you decide it ought to.

On Sat, May 31, 2008 at 01:25:25PM +0200, Robert Millan wrote:
> 
> To summarize what the current status of this bug is:
> 
>   - Users who install etch get bash completion as part of the default install
>     (as part of bash package).
> 
>   - Users who install lenny get bash completion as part of the default install
>     (via bash-completion package which is installed by tasksel).
> 
>   - Users who install etch and upgrade to lenny would preserve bash-completion
>     functionality because of the Recommends in bash, _but_ apt in etch doesn't
>     follow Recommends yet, so this only applies if they update apt first.
> 
> I think this shows clearly there's an unresolved transition here.  I understand
> bash-completion shouldn't be Essential, but the process for moving it out isn't
> being done properly.  It's not acceptable that end users get this functionality
> silently disabled without any obvious explanation (they might not even know
> which package provides it, or how).
> 
> My proposal is that in lenny, bash Depends on bash-completion, and for lenny+1
> it moves it back to Recommends.
> 
> Matthias, if you still have an objection to this approach, please bring it up.

-- 
Robert Millan

<GPLv2> I know my rights; I want my phone call!
<DRM> What good is a phone call… if you are unable to speak?
(as seen on /.)

Message #36 received at 468858@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Don Armstrong <don@debian.org>

To: 468858@bugs.debian.org, 484333@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Re: assigning to tech ctte (Re: status of this bug)

Date: Tue, 3 Jun 2008 13:07:29 -0700

On Tue, 03 Jun 2008, Robert Millan wrote:
> On Sat, May 31, 2008 at 01:25:25PM +0200, Robert Millan wrote:
> > I think this shows clearly there's an unresolved transition here.
> > I understand bash-completion shouldn't be Essential, but the
> > process for moving it out isn't being done properly. It's not
> > acceptable that end users get this functionality silently disabled
> > without any obvious explanation (they might not even know which
> > package provides it, or how).

The release notes can trivially deal with this by suggesting (as they
currently do!) that users use aptitude, which even in etch, handles
Recommends: properly. They can also mention this specific problem, and
handle the general class of problems where packages have been demoted
to Recommends and/or split.

Making bash-completion a dependency of bash obviates one of the
important advantages of splitting out bash-completion: the ability to
not have bash-completion installed.

I suggest reassigning this bug to release notes with the following
suggested verbiage:

  If you use apt-get to upgrade to lenny, you should first upgrade apt
  to the version in lenny, and then complete the upgrade to lenny
  using that version. The version of apt in lenny properly handles
  packages which have been split, with significant features only
  Recommended: by the unsplit packages.


Don Armstrong

-- 
The attackers hadn't simply robbed the bank. They had carried off
everything portable, including the security cameras, the carpets, the
chairs, and the light and plumbing fixtures. The conspirators had
deliberately punished the bank, for reasons best known to themselves,
or to their unknown controllers. They had superglued doors and
shattered windows, severed power and communications cables, poured
stinking toxins into the wallspaces, and concreted all of the sinks
and drains. In eight minutes, sixty people had ruined the building so
thouroughly that it had to be condemed and later demolished.
 -- Bruce Sterling, _Distraction_ p4

http://www.donarmstrong.com              http://rzlab.ucr.edu

Message #41 received at 468858@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Manoj Srivastava <srivasta@debian.org>

To: debian-ctte@lists.debian.org

Cc: 468858@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Re: assigning to tech ctte (Re: status of this bug)

Date: Tue, 03 Jun 2008 17:55:46 -0500

Hi,

        Isn't this kind of thing the normal fodder for the Release
 Notes?  I seem to recall a number of  upgrades where upgrading the
 package management tools _first_ was the only way to achieve a smooth
 upgrade, and this seems to be no different.  If the decisions is
 between having the release notes specify that package management tools
 have to be upgraded first, and not allowing users the freedom to
 install on,ly bash, and not the auto-completion package, it is entirely
 reasonable that the release team picks the former.

        manoj 
-- 
Sattinger's Law: It works better if you plug it in.
Manoj Srivastava <srivasta@debian.org> <http://www.debian.org/~srivasta/>  
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B  924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C

Message #44 received at 468858@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Robert Millan <rmh@aybabtu.com>

To: 468858@bugs.debian.org, 484333@bugs.debian.org

Cc: Don Armstrong <don@debian.org>

Subject: Re: assigning to tech ctte (Re: status of this bug)

Date: Thu, 5 Jun 2008 17:20:55 +0200

[ Please don't drop me from CC.  The BTS doesn't automaticaly forward
  mail to submitter. ]

On Tue, Jun 03, 2008 at 01:07:29PM -0700, Don Armstrong wrote:
> On Tue, 03 Jun 2008, Robert Millan wrote:
> > On Sat, May 31, 2008 at 01:25:25PM +0200, Robert Millan wrote:
> > > I think this shows clearly there's an unresolved transition here.
> > > I understand bash-completion shouldn't be Essential, but the
> > > process for moving it out isn't being done properly. It's not
> > > acceptable that end users get this functionality silently disabled
> > > without any obvious explanation (they might not even know which
> > > package provides it, or how).
> 
> The release notes can trivially deal with this by suggesting (as they
> currently do!) that users use aptitude, which even in etch, handles
> Recommends: properly. They can also mention this specific problem, and
> handle the general class of problems where packages have been demoted
> to Recommends and/or split.

Notice that according to popcon less than 24% of users run aptitude
(18699 / 78518).  I don't see how suggesting use of aptitude in the
release notes will bring that close to 100%;  in fact I doubt it would
have any significant impact (but it doesn't hurt to do it anyway, IMHO).

Besides, we're assuming that aptitude is a suitable replacement for apt
in all situations, which may not necessarily be so.  If you're really
confident that it is, to be consistent you should IMO propose that apt
becomes a dummy dependency on aptitude instead.

> Making bash-completion a dependency of bash obviates one of the
> important advantages of splitting out bash-completion: the ability to
> not have bash-completion installed.

That would be if the dependency were to last indefinitely.  The ability to
not have bash-completion installed was (AFAICT) the whole point of the
package split.  My concern is simply that no transition path has been
contemplated.

As a result the burden of figuring out why hitting TAB misteriusly stopped
working is put on the majority of users, just so that a minority doesn't
have to wait untill the transition is complete to free 216 kiB from
their disk.

> I suggest reassigning this bug to release notes with the following
> suggested verbiage:
> 
>   If you use apt-get to upgrade to lenny, you should first upgrade apt
>   to the version in lenny, and then complete the upgrade to lenny
>   using that version. The version of apt in lenny properly handles
>   packages which have been split, with significant features only
>   Recommended: by the unsplit packages.

Looks fine to me, but please clone instead of reassigning.

-- 
Robert Millan

<GPLv2> I know my rights; I want my phone call!
<DRM> What good is a phone call… if you are unable to speak?
(as seen on /.)

Message #49 received at 468858@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Marc Haber <mh+debian-packages@zugschlus.de>

To: Matthias Klose <doko@cs.tu-berlin.de>, 468858@bugs.debian.org, 468858-submitter@bugs.debian.org

Cc: Marc Haber <mh+debian-packages@zugschlus.de>

Subject: Re: no bash dependency on bash-completion

Date: Fri, 6 Jun 2008 17:02:07 +0200

On Sun, Apr 20, 2008 at 11:59:23AM +0200, Matthias Klose wrote:
> tag 468858 + wontfix
> thanks

Just for the record, I find it totally unacceptable to set a bug
wontfix without a single word of reasoning.

Greetings
Marc

-- 
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Marc Haber         | "I don't trust Computers. They | Mailadresse im Header
Mannheim, Germany  |  lose things."    Winona Ryder | Fon: *49 621 72739834
Nordisch by Nature |  How to make an American Quilt | Fax: *49 621 72739835

Message #57 received at 468858@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Don Armstrong <don@debian.org>

To: control@bugs.debian.org

Cc: 468858@bugs.debian.org

Subject: tagging 468858

Date: Fri, 06 Jun 2008 10:31:22 -0700

# Automatically generated email from bts, devscripts version 2.10.27
# tags are set at the maintainer's discretion; you can ask for clarification, but don't remove them
tags 468858 wontfix

Message #64 received at 468858-done@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Robert Millan <rmh@aybabtu.com>

To: 484333-done@bugs.debian.org

Cc: 468858-done@bugs.debian.org

Subject: bash-completion

Date: Sun, 8 Jun 2008 21:37:36 +0200

Hi,

It appears that although bash-completion isn't automaticaly dragged in
during the upgrade, in the next dist-upgrade that is performed apt will
include it.

I'm withdrawing my request;  I apologise for bringing this up without a
more in-depth investigation.

-- 
Robert Millan

<GPLv2> I know my rights; I want my phone call!
<DRM> What good is a phone call… if you are unable to speak?
(as seen on /.)

Send a report that this bug log contains spam.