Debian Bug report logs - #545366
dselect 1.15.4 does not distinguish between new and old packages

Display info messages

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

From: Petr Vandrovec <vandrove@vc.cvut.cz>

To: submit@bugs.debian.org

Subject: dselect 1.15.4 does not distinguish between new and old packages

Date: Sun, 06 Sep 2009 19:35:07 +0200

Package: dselect
Version: 1.15.4

Since today's update run dselect is completely confused and does not 
remember which packages are new and which are old - it lists all 
available and not installed packages as new, again and again.  And not 
only that, it also marks some of them for installation although I do not 
want them (and some are not installable at all - for some reason it 
wants to install libsasl2 which is not installable together with 
libsasl2-2).  I see that it updates available & status, they seem to 
contain valid data, but on load it somehow ignores them.

Besides that it creates some strange /var/lib/dpkg/updates/tmp.i which 
is full of lines saying '##padding', but other than that I do not see 
what can be wrong, and unfortunately diff between 1.15.3.1 and 1.15.4 is 
quite huge.

Thanks, Petr

Message #10 received at 545366@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Romain Bossart <romain.bossart@free.fr>

To: Debian Bug Tracking System <545366@bugs.debian.org>

Subject: dselect: same here

Date: Mon, 07 Sep 2009 07:57:40 +0200

Package: dselect
Version: 1.15.4
Severity: normal

Same problem here.
I had to use aptitude to see new packages.

Regards,
Romain


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

Kernel: Linux 2.6.30.1 (SMP w/4 CPU cores; PREEMPT)
Locale: LANG=en_US.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=en_US.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8)
Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/bash

Versions of packages dselect depends on:
ii  dpkg                      1.15.4         Debian package management system
ii  libc6                     2.9-26         GNU C Library: Shared libraries
ii  libgcc1                   1:4.4.1-3      GCC support library
ii  libncursesw5              5.7+20090803-2 shared libraries for terminal hand
ii  libstdc++6                4.4.1-3        The GNU Standard C++ Library v3

dselect recommends no packages.

dselect suggests no packages.

-- no debconf information

Message #15 received at 545366@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Raphael Hertzog <hertzog@debian.org>

To: Petr Vandrovec <vandrove@vc.cvut.cz>, 545366@bugs.debian.org, Romain Bossart <romain.bossart@free.fr>

Subject: Re: Bug#545366: dselect 1.15.4 does not distinguish between new and old packages

Date: Mon, 7 Sep 2009 09:11:45 +0200

On Sun, 06 Sep 2009, Petr Vandrovec wrote:
> Since today's update run dselect is completely confused and does not
> remember which packages are new and which are old - it lists all
> available and not installed packages as new, again and again.  And
> not only that, it also marks some of them for installation although
> I do not want them (and some are not installable at all - for some
> reason it wants to install libsasl2 which is not installable
> together with libsasl2-2).  I see that it updates available &
> status, they seem to contain valid data, but on load it somehow
> ignores them.
> 
> Besides that it creates some strange /var/lib/dpkg/updates/tmp.i
> which is full of lines saying '##padding', but other than that I do
> not see what can be wrong, and unfortunately diff between 1.15.3.1
> and 1.15.4 is quite huge.

You can use "git bisect" to isolate the problem more precisely. My bet
would be on the code that auto-cleans up the status database, maybe it
applies by error on the available file as well and thus it believes
that all packages are new everytime?

Cheers,
-- 
Raphaël Hertzog

Message #20 received at 545366@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Sven Joachim <svenjoac@gmx.de>

To: Raphael Hertzog <hertzog@debian.org>

Cc: 545366@bugs.debian.org, Petr Vandrovec <vandrove@vc.cvut.cz>, Romain Bossart <romain.bossart@free.fr>

Subject: Re: Bug#545366: dselect 1.15.4 does not distinguish between new and old packages

Date: Mon, 07 Sep 2009 09:43:37 +0200

On 2009-09-07 09:11 +0200, Raphael Hertzog wrote:

> On Sun, 06 Sep 2009, Petr Vandrovec wrote:
>> Since today's update run dselect is completely confused and does not
>> remember which packages are new and which are old - it lists all
>> available and not installed packages as new, again and again.  And
>> not only that, it also marks some of them for installation although
>> I do not want them (and some are not installable at all - for some
>> reason it wants to install libsasl2 which is not installable
>> together with libsasl2-2).  I see that it updates available &
>> status, they seem to contain valid data, but on load it somehow
>> ignores them.
>> 
>> Besides that it creates some strange /var/lib/dpkg/updates/tmp.i
>> which is full of lines saying '##padding', but other than that I do
>> not see what can be wrong, and unfortunately diff between 1.15.3.1
>> and 1.15.4 is quite huge.
>
> You can use "git bisect" to isolate the problem more precisely. My bet
> would be on the code that auto-cleans up the status database,

Certainly.  FWIW, the problem occurs also if only dpkg is upgraded to
1.15.4 and dselect stays at 1.15.3.1.

> maybe it applies by error on the available file as well and thus it
> believes that all packages are new everytime?

Given that the available package is as big as ever and dselect shows
every package as new even after you run "sync-available" (from the
dctrl-tools package), this does not seem to be the case.

Sven

Message #25 received at 545366@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Petr Vandrovec <vandrove@vc.cvut.cz>

To: Raphael Hertzog <hertzog@debian.org>

Cc: 545366@bugs.debian.org, Romain Bossart <romain.bossart@free.fr>

Subject: Re: Bug#545366: dselect 1.15.4 does not distinguish between new and old packages

Date: Mon, 07 Sep 2009 18:13:01 +0200

Raphael Hertzog napsal(a):
> On Sun, 06 Sep 2009, Petr Vandrovec wrote:
> You can use "git bisect" to isolate the problem more precisely. My bet
> would be on the code that auto-cleans up the status database, maybe it
> applies by error on the available file as well and thus it believes
> that all packages are new everytime?

224f0285abc304bec059e61447781... is first bad commit
commit 224f0285...
Author: Guillem Jover <guillem@debian.org>
Date:   Sun Jul 12 20:11:53 2009 +0200

   Obsolete --forget-old-unavail

   On parse mark not-installed leftover packages for automatic removal from
   the database on next dump ...

   Closes: #333394, #429262


And while we are on it, checkin 7fa96f35... (disable default automake 
paths) causes FTBFS on my box.
							Petr

Message #30 received at 545366@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Guillem Jover <guillem@debian.org>

To: Sven Joachim <svenjoac@gmx.de>, 545366@bugs.debian.org

Cc: Raphael Hertzog <hertzog@debian.org>, Petr Vandrovec <vandrove@vc.cvut.cz>, Romain Bossart <romain.bossart@free.fr>

Subject: Re: Bug#545366: dselect 1.15.4 does not distinguish between new and old packages

Date: Tue, 8 Sep 2009 09:28:06 +0200

Hi!

On Mon, 2009-09-07 at 09:43:37 +0200, Sven Joachim wrote:
> On 2009-09-07 09:11 +0200, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> > On Sun, 06 Sep 2009, Petr Vandrovec wrote:
> > > Since today's update run dselect is completely confused and does not
> > > remember which packages are new and which are old - it lists all
> > > available and not installed packages as new, again and again. And

Hrmmmf, ok missed that one when doing the automatic forget change on
dpkg...

> > > not only that, it also marks some of them for installation although
> > > I do not want them (and some are not installable at all - for some
> > > reason it wants to install libsasl2 which is not installable
> > > together with libsasl2-2).  I see that it updates available &
> > > status, they seem to contain valid data, but on load it somehow
> > > ignores them.

The installability problems I assume is due to some transition going
on in unstable right now.

> > > Besides that it creates some strange /var/lib/dpkg/updates/tmp.i
> > > which is full of lines saying '##padding', but other than that I do
> > > not see what can be wrong, and unfortunately diff between 1.15.3.1
> > > and 1.15.4 is quite huge.

The “tmp.i” file is normal, yes.

> > You can use "git bisect" to isolate the problem more precisely. My bet
> > would be on the code that auto-cleans up the status database,
> 
> Certainly.  FWIW, the problem occurs also if only dpkg is upgraded to
> 1.15.4 and dselect stays at 1.15.3.1.
> 
> > maybe it applies by error on the available file as well and thus it
> > believes that all packages are new everytime?
> 
> Given that the available package is as big as ever and dselect shows
> every package as new even after you run "sync-available" (from the
> dctrl-tools package), this does not seem to be the case.

The problem is that dselect used the status file to track not seen
and seen not-installed packages as either want_unknown or want_purge
want states. And was setting all want_unknown packages to want_purge
on normal exit (not using X keyibindig).

This increases the status file, the parsing and processing time when
doing dependency resolutions and package iterations for everyone, and
just to be able to show new packages on dselect. The correct solution
here is not to revert the change, but to store the seen/not-seen
information in another place, in a similar way as how apt/aptitude do
it. And ideally in a unified place which all front-ends can share, so
we avoid duplication.

I'll put it on the pending stuff to discuss with the front-end
developers.

regards,
guillem

Message #35 received at 545366@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Petr Vandrovec <vandrove@vc.cvut.cz>

To: Guillem Jover <guillem@debian.org>

Cc: Sven Joachim <svenjoac@gmx.de>, 545366@bugs.debian.org, Raphael Hertzog <hertzog@debian.org>, Romain Bossart <romain.bossart@free.fr>

Subject: Re: Bug#545366: dselect 1.15.4 does not distinguish between new and old packages

Date: Tue, 08 Sep 2009 17:33:59 +0200

Guillem Jover napsal(a):
> Hi!
> This increases the status file, the parsing and processing time when
> doing dependency resolutions and package iterations for everyone, and
> just to be able to show new packages on dselect. The correct solution
> here is not to revert the change, but to store the seen/not-seen
> information in another place, in a similar way as how apt/aptitude do
> it. And ideally in a unified place which all front-ends can share, so
> we avoid duplication.

IMHO change should be reverted until old functionality can be achieved 
through some other way - unless you can achieve such functionality today.
						Petr

Message #40 received at 545366@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Domenico Andreoli <cavok@debian.org>

To: 545366@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Re: Bug#545366: dselect 1.15.4 does not distinguish between new and old packages

Date: Thu, 10 Sep 2009 01:08:48 +0200

Yes please, revert that commit. dselect is currently unusable.

regards,
Domenico

-----[ Domenico Andreoli, aka cavok
 --[ http://www.dandreoli.com/gpgkey.asc
   ---[ 3A0F 2F80 F79C 678A 8936  4FEE 0677 9033 A20E BC50

Message #45 received at 545366@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Raphael Hertzog <hertzog@debian.org>

To: Petr Vandrovec <vandrove@vc.cvut.cz>, 545366@bugs.debian.org

Cc: Sven Joachim <svenjoac@gmx.de>, Romain Bossart <romain.bossart@free.fr>, Domenico Andreoli <cavok@debian.org>

Subject: Re: Bug#545366: dselect 1.15.4 does not distinguish between new and old packages

Date: Thu, 10 Sep 2009 09:03:07 +0200

severity 545366 serious
thanks

On Tue, 08 Sep 2009, Petr Vandrovec wrote:
> IMHO change should be reverted until old functionality can be
> achieved through some other way - unless you can achieve such
> functionality today.

I'd like to remind everybody that we're looking for someone to step up and
maintain dselect:
http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=282283

Here's your chance instead of requesting an instant fix from people who
would rather not have to maintain dselect as part of dpkg.

I'll mark this bug as RC so that it doesn't get into testing, you're free
to downgrade dpkg in the mean time.

Cheers,
-- 
Raphaël Hertzog

Message #52 received at 545366@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: ctl <ctl@hfds.com>

To: 545366@bugs.debian.org

Subject: possible reason why dselect is currently broken in sid and also in testing...

Date: Mon, 28 Sep 2009 00:46:48 -0500

there is no  /var/cache/apt/available

partial output of dselect update ...
Replacing available packages info, using /var/cache/apt/available.

man dselect
dselect --admindir <directory>
Changes  the  directory  where  the  dpkg `status',`available' and 
similar files are located. This defaults to /var/lib/dpkg and normally 
there shouldn't be any  need  to change it.

man dpkg
dpkg --update-avail, --merge-avail Packages-file
Update  dpkg's  and  dselect's  idea  of  which  packages are available. 
With action --merge-avail, old information is combined with information 
from Packages-file.  With action  --update-avail, old information is 
replaced with the information in the Packages-file. The Packages-file 
distributed with Debian is simply named Packages. dpkg keeps its record 
of available packages in /var/lib/dpkg/available.

hth
really
ctl
aka jetscreamer

Message #57 received at 545366@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: ctl <ctl@hfds.com>

To: 545366@bugs.debian.org

Subject: lenny downgrade

Date: Thu, 01 Oct 2009 09:39:24 -0500

even downgrading to the version of dselect in lenny does not fix this 
behavior. therefore (obviously?) this is not a problem in dselect but 
something else? did somebody change dpkg's defaults? beyond me. :(

hope dselect gets fixed soon though. i really don't like aptitude.
nor anything else...

tia
ctl

Message #62 received at 545366@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: ctl <ctl@hfds.com>

To: 545366@bugs.debian.org

Subject: additional observed behavior

Date: Fri, 09 Oct 2009 00:16:34 -0500

don't know if this helps, but when i tried cp'ing available to 
/var/cache/apt, when i do dselect update, /var/cache/apt/available gets 
deleted.

also, cp'ing var/lib/dpkg to /var/cache/apt then setting admindir in the 
command line didn't work, nor setting it in /etc/dpkg/*.conf. still deleted.

setting admindir manually in console and also in the conffiles to the 
default location didn't work either. :(


anyway
ctl

Message #69 received at 545366-submitter@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Guillem Jover <guillem@debian.org>

To: 545366-submitter@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Bug#545366 marked as pending

Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2009 16:20:47 +0000

tag 545366 pending
thanks

Hello,

Bug #545366 reported by you has been fixed in the Git repository. You can
see the changelog below, and you can check the diff of the fix at:

    http://git.debian.org/?p=dpkg/dpkg.git;a=commitdiff;h=d8603d7

---
commit d8603d75ba95ac1e1a3bf79e772416508b8f4f1b
Author: Guillem Jover <guillem@debian.org>
Date:   Mon Oct 19 15:14:39 2009 +0200

    dselect: Do not mark any package as unseen
    
    This is a workaround until it learns how to store such information
    again.
    
    Closes: #545366

diff --git a/debian/changelog b/debian/changelog
index 25edd16..189667e 100644
--- a/debian/changelog
+++ b/debian/changelog
@@ -1,6 +1,7 @@
 dpkg (1.15.4.1) UNRELEASED; urgency=low
 
-  *
+  * Do not mark any package as unseen in dselect. This is a workaround
+    until it learns how to store such information again. Closes: #545366
 
  -- Guillem Jover <guillem@debian.org>  Mon, 19 Oct 2009 15:04:40 +0200
 

Message #74 received at 545366-close@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Guillem Jover <guillem@debian.org>

To: 545366-close@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Bug#545366: fixed in dpkg 1.15.4.1

Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2009 17:02:29 +0000

Source: dpkg
Source-Version: 1.15.4.1

We believe that the bug you reported is fixed in the latest version of
dpkg, which is due to be installed in the Debian FTP archive:

dpkg-dev_1.15.4.1_all.deb
  to pool/main/d/dpkg/dpkg-dev_1.15.4.1_all.deb
dpkg_1.15.4.1.dsc
  to pool/main/d/dpkg/dpkg_1.15.4.1.dsc
dpkg_1.15.4.1.tar.gz
  to pool/main/d/dpkg/dpkg_1.15.4.1.tar.gz
dpkg_1.15.4.1_amd64.deb
  to pool/main/d/dpkg/dpkg_1.15.4.1_amd64.deb
dselect_1.15.4.1_amd64.deb
  to pool/main/d/dpkg/dselect_1.15.4.1_amd64.deb



A summary of the changes between this version and the previous one is
attached.

Thank you for reporting the bug, which will now be closed.  If you
have further comments please address them to 545366@bugs.debian.org,
and the maintainer will reopen the bug report if appropriate.

Debian distribution maintenance software
pp.
Guillem Jover <guillem@debian.org> (supplier of updated dpkg package)

(This message was generated automatically at their request; if you
believe that there is a problem with it please contact the archive
administrators by mailing ftpmaster@debian.org)


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Format: 1.8
Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2009 15:15:17 +0200
Source: dpkg
Binary: dpkg dpkg-dev dselect
Architecture: source amd64 all
Version: 1.15.4.1
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: medium
Maintainer: Dpkg Developers <debian-dpkg@lists.debian.org>
Changed-By: Guillem Jover <guillem@debian.org>
Description: 
 dpkg       - Debian package management system
 dpkg-dev   - Debian package development tools
 dselect    - Debian package management front-end
Closes: 545366
Changes: 
 dpkg (1.15.4.1) unstable; urgency=medium
 .
   * Do not mark any package as unseen in dselect. This is a workaround
     until it learns how to store such information again. Closes: #545366
Checksums-Sha1: 
 529a095ca3c787e9bb4e2444f444691067f4e5eb 1219 dpkg_1.15.4.1.dsc
 bd1c8f8e1d2c9761f3b823cb82b5f0104cb6ac79 7037176 dpkg_1.15.4.1.tar.gz
 1dc5af28f7ec13d7e2c404d464a13190b8c22ce6 2149876 dpkg_1.15.4.1_amd64.deb
 200fcb03ac84330f9005ee85f2a84f6db9bf46be 705026 dselect_1.15.4.1_amd64.deb
 cddbb11dcb2446a62bbf095d57e7327beada393e 690544 dpkg-dev_1.15.4.1_all.deb
Checksums-Sha256: 
 715fcf6fb77a52eadd0f00e41503b2423c0a2a253dab38f0cd2f4f9e53a2f0d2 1219 dpkg_1.15.4.1.dsc
 a3b0932748648d0699d28f3327a0d5eb8287f51e6cacecac90c418b197a7da5f 7037176 dpkg_1.15.4.1.tar.gz
 c1bed7400f7cb3591e877f35a4c667c5ac365fed9cf062d56e887d07101ceb2e 2149876 dpkg_1.15.4.1_amd64.deb
 e688c1a91e23d95ab5637c08ccd6a29c779d9260df4ecdf4ac27e7d58ac0dff0 705026 dselect_1.15.4.1_amd64.deb
 0a8cb00b9a23e6cef6e109457abf0d4e22008ddb2ad2b6a02a63061ec8134a83 690544 dpkg-dev_1.15.4.1_all.deb
Files: 
 1b3cfefb8ce5d220603bd2aaaf083653 1219 admin required dpkg_1.15.4.1.dsc
 273a83fcd9d2d682585804cb48751e48 7037176 admin required dpkg_1.15.4.1.tar.gz
 0f87728f30161f72c518055e26f8fa1a 2149876 admin required dpkg_1.15.4.1_amd64.deb
 bb80e90b838d2f5689b1799925f9391a 705026 admin optional dselect_1.15.4.1_amd64.deb
 275e2affd0278438f7833ed93cb05efc 690544 utils optional dpkg-dev_1.15.4.1_all.deb

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux)

iEYEARECAAYFAkrcj9oACgkQuW9ciZ2SjJtxRACeIsaiOeqMVgtD5IM+qytiiqx+
PC8An1xFjW+NmBNw4nVS+QE6zoyKe3J8
=JxdA
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Message #79 received at 545366@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Takehiko Abe <keke@gol.com>

To: 545366@bugs.debian.org

Subject: the fix does not work

Date: Sat, 24 Oct 2009 11:50:25 +0900

The fix does not work for me. dselect behaves the same way as it did
with 1.15.4.1.

Message #84 received at 545366@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Raphael Hertzog <hertzog@debian.org>

To: Takehiko Abe <keke@gol.com>, 545366@bugs.debian.org

Cc: Sandro Weiser <sandro.weiser@informatik.tu-chemnitz.de>

Subject: Re: Bug#545366: the fix does not work

Date: Sat, 24 Oct 2009 09:19:31 +0200

On Sat, 24 Oct 2009, Takehiko Abe wrote:
> The fix does not work for me. dselect behaves the same way as it did
> with 1.15.4.1.

What dselect method are you all using?

Cheers,
-- 
Raphaël Hertzog

Message #89 received at 545366@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Takehiko Abe <keke@gol.com>

To: Raphael Hertzog <hertzog@debian.org>

Cc: 545366@bugs.debian.org, Sandro Weiser <sandro.weiser@informatik.tu-chemnitz.de>

Subject: Re: Bug#545366: the fix does not work

Date: Sat, 24 Oct 2009 17:10:50 +0900

Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> Takehiko Abe wrote:
>> The fix does not work for me. dselect behaves the same way as it did
>> with 1.15.4.1.

(agh. I meant 1.15.4 ; not 1.15.4.1. sorry)

> 
> What dselect method are you all using?

I use APT method.

Message #94 received at 545366@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Piotr Engelking <inkerman42@gmail.com>

To: 545366@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Re: Bug#545366: dselect 1.15.4 does not distinguish between new and old packages

Date: Sun, 25 Oct 2009 08:24:24 +0100

reopen 545366
thanks

dselect 1.15.4.1 (with dpkg 1.15.4.1) still does not distinguish
between new and old packages. This makes dselect mostly useless on
upgrades and completely useless on adding new repositories.

The only difference between 1.15.4 and 1.15.4.1 is that former marks
new and old packages as new, and the latter marks new and old packages
as old.

Message #101 received at 545366-done@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Raphael Hertzog <hertzog@debian.org>

To: Piotr Engelking <inkerman42@gmail.com>, 545366-done@bugs.debian.org

Cc: 551638@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Re: Bug#545366: dselect 1.15.4 does not distinguish between new and old packages

Date: Sun, 25 Oct 2009 11:40:41 +0100

Version: 1.15.4.1

On Sun, 25 Oct 2009, Piotr Engelking wrote:
> The only difference between 1.15.4 and 1.15.4.1 is that former marks
> new and old packages as new, and the latter marks new and old packages
> as old.

That's what we wanted. Closing this bug again. The fact that it doesn't
keep track of new packages is tracked in #551638 and is not release
critical for us.

Please use the other bug for further discussion.

Cheers,
-- 
Raphaël Hertzog

Message #106 received at 545366@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Takehiko Abe <keke@gol.com>

To: 545366@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Am I missing something?

Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2009 10:39:38 +0900

> That's what we wanted. Closing this bug again. The fact that it
> doesn't keep track of new packages is tracked in #551638 and is not
> release critical for us.

What about the "it also marks some of them for installation although I
do not want them" part of the original report? That makes dselect
unusable. Is it not enough to be release critical?

Am I missing something? Puzzled.

Message #111 received at 545366@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Raphael Hertzog <hertzog@debian.org>

To: Takehiko Abe <keke@gol.com>, 545366@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Re: Bug#545366: Am I missing something?

Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2009 10:39:00 +0100

On Tue, 27 Oct 2009, Takehiko Abe wrote:
> >That's what we wanted. Closing this bug again. The fact that it
> >doesn't keep track of new packages is tracked in #551638 and is not
> >release critical for us.
> 
> What about the "it also marks some of them for installation although I
> do not want them" part of the original report? That makes dselect
> unusable. Is it not enough to be release critical?

Why would it do that? I supposed that this was a consequence of all
packages being marked as new and somehow re-considered for installation.

> Am I missing something? Puzzled.

Yes, dselect has no real maintainer. Step up if you care about it.
Our goal is to get rid of it within dpkg as soon as possible (i.e. when
libdpkg is advanced enough for dselect).

Cheers,
-- 
Raphaël Hertzog

Message #116 received at 545366@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Christian Perrier <bubulle@debian.org>

To: 545366@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Re: Bug#545366: Am I missing something?

Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2009 08:03:25 +0100

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

Quoting Raphael Hertzog (hertzog@debian.org):

> Yes, dselect has no real maintainer. Step up if you care about it.
> Our goal is to get rid of it within dpkg as soon as possible (i.e. when
> libdpkg is advanced enough for dselect).


Frankly speaking, for other packages where there is no real
maintainer, where the userbase is small and that have many bugs, we
are not that sentimental and the packages are removed from the
archive. Period, basta and voilà.

Who is really thinking that someone will *ever* step up to maintain
dselect?

The only benefit ofhaving it in dpkg right now is to make you
(Raphaël, Guillem) waste valuable time in answering such bugs and, for
instance, preventing RC bugs on dselect to keep dpkg away from
testing.

[signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, inline)]

Message #121 received at 545366@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Raphael Hertzog <hertzog@debian.org>

To: Christian Perrier <bubulle@debian.org>, 545366@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Re: Bug#545366: Am I missing something?

Date: Thu, 29 Oct 2009 08:04:33 +0100

On Wed, 28 Oct 2009, Christian Perrier wrote:
> Frankly speaking, for other packages where there is no real
> maintainer, where the userbase is small and that have many bugs, we
> are not that sentimental and the packages are removed from the
> archive. Period, basta and voilà.
> 
> Who is really thinking that someone will *ever* step up to maintain
> dselect?

Ian Jackson said once that he would take it over if the situation requires
it... and unfortunately the userbase is not small enough to remove the
package without creating emotional reaction.

Cheers,
-- 
Raphaël Hertzog

Send a report that this bug log contains spam.