Debian Bug report logs - #830267
dpkg: Segmentation fault when purging package in APT test case

Toggle useless messages

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

From: Julian Andres Klode <jak@debian.org>

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

Subject: dpkg: Segmentation fault when purging package in APT test case

Date: Thu, 7 Jul 2016 20:37:39 +0200

Package: dpkg
Version: 1.18.9
Severity: serious

dpkg fails to purge a package in our test suite, crashing with a segmentation fault. You can reproduce
it by building apt and running test/integration/test-bug-712116-dpkg-pre-install-pkgs-hook-multiarch -
I have also included the backtrace here.

#0  namenodetouse (namenode=0x0, pkg=pkg@entry=0x560c3548cfb0, pkgbin=pkgbin@entry=0x560c3548d000) at ../../src/help.c:58
        r = <optimized out>
#1  0x0000560c33884750 in removal_bulk_remove_configfiles (pkg=0x560c3548cfb0) at ../../src/remove.c:533
        usenode = <optimized out>
        removevb_state = {used = 0}
        fnvb = {used = 65, size = 74, buf = 0x560c35491730 "/tmp/user/1000/tmp.g6iz3eF7hX/rootdir/etc/compiz.conf/compiz.conf"}
        removevb = {used = 0, size = 0, buf = 0x0}
        namenode = <optimized out>
        conffbasenamelen = <optimized out>
        conffbasename = <optimized out>
        lconffp = <optimized out>
        de = <optimized out>
        p = <optimized out>
        dsd = <optimized out>
        rc = <optimized out>
        conffnameused = <optimized out>
        conff = 0x560c3548d1b0
        searchfile = <optimized out>
        ext = <optimized out>
        removeconffexts = {0x560c338a8def "~", 0x560c338a4d45 ".bak", 0x560c338a4d4a "%", 0x560c3389dc6b ".dpkg-tmp", 0x560c3389dc75 ".dpkg-new", 0x560c338a4d4c ".dpkg-old", 0x560c3389f0b1 ".dpkg-dist", 0x0}
#2  removal_bulk (pkg=pkg@entry=0x560c3548cfb0) at ../../src/remove.c:637
        foundpostrm = <optimized out>
#3  0x0000560c33885553 in deferred_remove (pkg=0x560c3548cfb0) at ../../src/remove.c:192
        raemsgs = {used = 0, size = 0, buf = 0x0}
        dep = <optimized out>
        rok = DEP_CHECK_OK
#4  0x0000560c33883142 in process_queue () at ../../src/packages.c:288
        rundown = <optimized out>
        pkg = 0x560c3548cfb0
        action_todo = act_purge
        ejbuf = {{__jmpbuf = {0, 1008670450863515041, 1, 140722198930704, 0, 0, -1006724711060265567, -6780200583402150495}, __mask_was_saved = 0, __saved_mask = {__val = {140240791502169, 140722198930256, 94610404235612, 140722198930256, 94610404235761, 0, 16, 94610433560496, 94610404104128, 140722198930704, 0, 0, 140240791507784, 0, 94610404214745, 140722198930704}}}}
        istobe = <optimized out>
        __func__ = "process_queue"
        __PRETTY_FUNCTION__ = "process_queue"
#5  0x0000560c33883488 in packages (argv=<optimized out>) at ../../src/packages.c:162
No locals.
#6  0x0000560c338756a9 in main (argc=<optimized out>, argv=0x7ffc70ade568) at ../../src/main.c:901
        ret = <optimized out>

-- System Information:
Debian Release: stretch/sid
  APT prefers unstable
  APT policy: (900, 'unstable'), (500, 'unstable-debug'), (500, 'testing'), (500, 'stable'), (100, 'experimental'), (1, 'experimental-debug')
Architecture: amd64 (x86_64)
Foreign Architectures: i386

Kernel: Linux 4.6.0-1-amd64 (SMP w/4 CPU cores)
Locale: LANG=en_IE.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=en_IE.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8)
Shell: /bin/sh linked to /usr/bin/dash
Init: systemd (via /run/systemd/system)

Versions of packages dpkg depends on:
ii  libbz2-1.0   1.0.6-8
ii  libc6        2.22-13
ii  liblzma5     5.1.1alpha+20120614-2.1
ii  libselinux1  2.5-3
ii  tar          1.29-1
ii  zlib1g       1:1.2.8.dfsg-2+b1

dpkg recommends no packages.

Versions of packages dpkg suggests:
ii  apt  1.3~exp3

-- no debconf information

-- 
Debian Developer - deb.li/jak | jak-linux.org - free software dev

When replying, only quote what is necessary, and write each reply
directly below the part(s) it pertains to (`inline'). Thank you.

Message #10 received at 830267@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Guillem Jover <guillem@debian.org>

To: Julian Andres Klode <jak@debian.org>, 830267@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Re: Bug#830267: dpkg: Segmentation fault when purging package in APT test case

Date: Thu, 7 Jul 2016 21:14:10 +0200

Hi!

On Thu, 2016-07-07 at 20:37:39 +0200, Julian Andres Klode wrote:
> Package: dpkg
> Version: 1.18.9
> Severity: serious
> 
> dpkg fails to purge a package in our test suite, crashing with a segmentation fault. You can reproduce
> it by building apt and running test/integration/test-bug-712116-dpkg-pre-install-pkgs-hook-multiarch -
> I have also included the backtrace here.

> #0  namenodetouse (namenode=0x0, pkg=pkg@entry=0x560c3548cfb0, pkgbin=pkgbin@entry=0x560c3548d000) at ../../src/help.c:58
>         r = <optimized out>
> #1  0x0000560c33884750 in removal_bulk_remove_configfiles (pkg=0x560c3548cfb0) at ../../src/remove.c:533

Hmm, thanks for the report, I know where this is coming from, I'm
fixing it and preparing an upload right away for later today.

Thanks,
Guillem

Message #13 received at 830267-submitter@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Guillem Jover <guillem@debian.org>

To: 830267-submitter@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Bug#830267 in package dpkg marked as pending

Date: Thu, 07 Jul 2016 23:38:43 +0000

Control: tag 830267 pending

Hi!

Bug #830267 in package dpkg reported by you has been fixed in
the dpkg/dpkg.git Git repository. You can see the changelog below, and
you can check the diff of the fix at:

    https://anonscm.debian.org/cgit/dpkg/dpkg.git/diff/?id=1b33c66

---
commit 1b33c6611fef5a8a370e8dd94b01114d6b33ad33
Author: Guillem Jover <guillem@debian.org>
Date:   Thu Jul 7 22:27:42 2016 +0200

    dpkg: Use the conffile name instead of the real pathname it might refer to
    
    When activating file triggers on conffile purge, use the conffile name
    instead of the real pathname it might refer to. This fixes a segfault
    when using --instdir, or when the conffile has been moved around and
    replaced with a symlink to the target.
    
    Regression introduced in 2f065fc151ac4635ae40bd769d1be810e1222e05.
    
    Closes: #830267
    Stable-Candidate: 1.17.x

diff --git a/debian/changelog b/debian/changelog
index 7621023..84d7d4a 100644
--- a/debian/changelog
+++ b/debian/changelog
@@ -2,6 +2,11 @@ dpkg (1.18.10) UNRELEASED; urgency=medium
 
   [ Guillem Jover ]
   * Fix a short-lived memory leak in dpkg archive argument parsing.
+  * When activating file triggers on conffile purge, use the conffile name
+    instead of the real pathname it might refer to. This fixes a segfault
+    when using --instdir, or when the conffile has been moved around and
+    replaced with a symlink to the target.
+    Regression introduced in dpkg 1.18.8. Closes: #830267
   * Perl modules:
     - Disable fixdebugpath feature on unsafe characters in the path.
   * Documentation:

Message #20 received at 830267@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Francesco Poli <invernomuto@paranoici.org>

To: Guillem Jover <guillem@debian.org>, Julian Andres Klode <jak@debian.org>, 830267@bugs.debian.org

Cc: Debian Release Team <debian-release@lists.debian.org>

Subject: Re: Bug#830267: dpkg: Segmentation fault when purging package in APT test case

Date: Sun, 24 Jul 2016 12:20:16 +0200

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

On Thu, 7 Jul 2016 21:14:10 +0200 Guillem Jover wrote:

[...]
> On Thu, 2016-07-07 at 20:37:39 +0200, Julian Andres Klode wrote:
> > Package: dpkg
> > Version: 1.18.9
> > Severity: serious
> > 
> > dpkg fails to purge a package
[...]
> 
> Hmm, thanks for the report, I know where this is coming from, I'm
> fixing it and preparing an upload right away for later today.
[...]

Hello Guillem,
I see that this serious bug has been pending since July the 7th.
I thought dpkg/1.18.10 was going to be uploaded to unstable very soon
after having found the fix for this regression, but apparently
something went wrong.

In the meanwhile, dpkg/1.18.9 managed to migrate to testing [1], despite
introducing this RC bug: I wonder how that was even possible... do the
testing migration checks skip pending RC bugs?!? a pending bug is not a
fixed bug!!! I am Cc-ing the Release Team about this.

Dear Guillem, could you please clarify the status of this bug?

Dear Release Team, could you please explain what I failed to understand
about the testing migration rules [2]?

Please let me know, thanks for your time.



[1] https://tracker.debian.org/news/785311
[2] https://www.debian.org/devel/testing


-- 
 http://www.inventati.org/frx/
 There's not a second to spare! To the laboratory!
..................................................... Francesco Poli .
 GnuPG key fpr == CA01 1147 9CD2 EFDF FB82  3925 3E1C 27E1 1F69 BFFE

[Message part 2 (application/pgp-signature, inline)]

Message #25 received at 830267@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Jonathan Wiltshire <jmw@debian.org>

To: Francesco Poli <invernomuto@paranoici.org>

Cc: 830267@bugs.debian.org, Debian Release Team <debian-release@lists.debian.org>

Subject: Re: Bug#830267: dpkg: Segmentation fault when purging package in APT test case

Date: Sun, 24 Jul 2016 13:51:45 +0100

On 2016-07-24 11:20, Francesco Poli wrote:
> In the meanwhile, dpkg/1.18.9 managed to migrate to testing [1], 
> despite
> introducing this RC bug: I wonder how that was even possible... do the
> testing migration checks skip pending RC bugs?!? a pending bug is not a
> fixed bug!!! I am Cc-ing the Release Team about this.
> 
> Dear Release Team, could you please explain what I failed to understand
> about the testing migration rules [2]?

Your understanding is correct - an RC bug affecting sid and not testing 
is considered a regression and blocks migration, whereas one which 
affects both suites does not.

Britney is fed that information from the BTS. The migration happened 
because on 2016-07-18T22:00 #830267 was a regression, but on 
2016-07-19T10:00 it was marked as also affecting testing, so the package 
was migrated. I don't know what happened in the BTS to cause that 
change, certainly nothing on the bug log that I can see.

It now, of course, correctly affects both sid and testing, so it is no 
longer a regression and further migrations will happen (notwithstanding 
other bugs affecting dpkg in sid).

-- 
Jonathan Wiltshire                                      jmw@debian.org
Debian Developer                         http://people.debian.org/~jmw

4096R: 0xD3524C51 / 0A55 B7C5 1223 3942 86EC  74C3 5394 479D D352 4C51

<directhex> i have six years of solaris sysadmin experience, from
            8->10. i am well qualified to say it is made from bonghits
			layered on top of bonghits

Message #30 received at 830267@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Francesco Poli <invernomuto@paranoici.org>

To: Debian Release Team <debian-release@lists.debian.org>

Cc: 830267@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Re: Bug#830267: dpkg: Segmentation fault when purging package in APT test case

Date: Sun, 24 Jul 2016 17:00:36 +0200

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

On Sun, 24 Jul 2016 13:51:45 +0100 Jonathan Wiltshire wrote:

> On 2016-07-24 11:20, Francesco Poli wrote:
[...]
> > Dear Release Team, could you please explain what I failed to understand
> > about the testing migration rules [2]?
> 
> Your understanding is correct - an RC bug affecting sid and not testing 
> is considered a regression and blocks migration, whereas one which 
> affects both suites does not.

Good, thanks for confirming!

> 
> Britney is fed that information from the BTS. The migration happened 
> because on 2016-07-18T22:00 #830267 was a regression, but on 
> 2016-07-19T10:00 it was marked as also affecting testing, so the package 
> was migrated. I don't know what happened in the BTS to cause that 
> change, certainly nothing on the bug log that I can see.

I hope it's possible to investigate further, in order to find out what
really happened: needless to say, I think that the correctness of the
migration process is of great importance to the quality of Debian
testing (and, consequently, of future stable releases!).

Should <owner@bugs.d.o> be contacted, perhaps?


-- 
 http://www.inventati.org/frx/
 There's not a second to spare! To the laboratory!
..................................................... Francesco Poli .
 GnuPG key fpr == CA01 1147 9CD2 EFDF FB82  3925 3E1C 27E1 1F69 BFFE

[Message part 2 (application/pgp-signature, inline)]

Message #35 received at 830267@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Jonathan Wiltshire <jmw@debian.org>

To: Francesco Poli <invernomuto@paranoici.org>

Cc: Debian Release Team <debian-release@lists.debian.org>, 830267@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Re: Bug#830267: dpkg: Segmentation fault when purging package in APT test case

Date: Sun, 24 Jul 2016 16:24:19 +0100

On 2016-07-24 16:00, Francesco Poli wrote:
> I hope it's possible to investigate further, in order to find out what
> really happened: needless to say, I think that the correctness of the
> migration process is of great importance to the quality of Debian
> testing (and, consequently, of future stable releases!).
> 
> Should <owner@bugs.d.o> be contacted, perhaps?

Sure, if you'd like to.

-- 
Jonathan Wiltshire                                      jmw@debian.org
Debian Developer                         http://people.debian.org/~jmw

4096R: 0xD3524C51 / 0A55 B7C5 1223 3942 86EC  74C3 5394 479D D352 4C51

<directhex> i have six years of solaris sysadmin experience, from
            8->10. i am well qualified to say it is made from bonghits
			layered on top of bonghits

Message #40 received at 830267@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Francesco Poli <invernomuto@paranoici.org>

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

Cc: Debian Release Team <debian-release@lists.debian.org>, 830267@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Re: Bug#830267: dpkg: Segmentation fault when purging package in APT test case

Date: Sun, 24 Jul 2016 18:06:05 +0200

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

On Sun, 24 Jul 2016 16:24:19 +0100 Jonathan Wiltshire wrote:

> On 2016-07-24 16:00, Francesco Poli wrote:
[...]
> > Should <owner@bugs.d.o> be contacted, perhaps?
> 
> Sure, if you'd like to.

Dear BTS owner,
could you please investigate on what happened to bug #830267 on
2016-07-19T10:00 ?

Please take a look at
https://bugs.debian.org/830267#20
https://bugs.debian.org/830267#25
for more context.

Thanks for your time.


-- 
 http://www.inventati.org/frx/
 There's not a second to spare! To the laboratory!
..................................................... Francesco Poli .
 GnuPG key fpr == CA01 1147 9CD2 EFDF FB82  3925 3E1C 27E1 1F69 BFFE

[Message part 2 (application/pgp-signature, inline)]

Message #45 received at 830267@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Don Armstrong <don@debian.org>

To: Francesco Poli <invernomuto@paranoici.org>

Cc: Debian Bug Tracking System owner <owner@bugs.debian.org>, Debian Release Team <debian-release@lists.debian.org>, 830267@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Re: Bug#830267: dpkg: Segmentation fault when purging package in APT test case

Date: Sun, 24 Jul 2016 11:43:19 -0500

On Sun, 24 Jul 2016, Francesco Poli wrote:
> On Sun, 24 Jul 2016 16:24:19 +0100 Jonathan Wiltshire wrote:
> 
> > On 2016-07-24 16:00, Francesco Poli wrote:
> [...]
> > > Should <owner@bugs.d.o> be contacted, perhaps?
> > 
> > Sure, if you'd like to.
> 
> Dear BTS owner,
> could you please investigate on what happened to bug #830267 on
> 2016-07-19T10:00 ?
> 
> Please take a look at
> https://bugs.debian.org/830267#20
> https://bugs.debian.org/830267#25
> for more context.

Hrm; it was shown as affecting testing at T0600 (and all subsequent
runs):

status-201607190600:number=830267
status-201607190600-testing=1
status-201607190600-unstable=1

but not on the immediately preceding run:

status-201607190000:number=830267
status-201607190000-testing=0
status-201607190000-unstable=1

(You can check this out with grep -C 14 number=830267
/srv/bugs.debian.org/bugscan/stati/status-201607{19,20}*; on buxtehude or by
getting those status files from the web interface and examining them.)

That's really odd; I haven't changed anything on the BTS side during
that time period which would explain that happening.

Unfortunately, I don't know when the BTS thought that 1.18.9 was
actually in testing and not in unstable. I'll try to check out snapshots
later this week to see if I can figure out when the transition actually
happened, or if there was something else going on in the archive to
explain it.

-- 
Don Armstrong                      https://www.donarmstrong.com

Americans can always be counted on to do the right thing, after they
have exhausted all other possibilities.
 -- W. Churchill

Message #50 received at 830267@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Francesco Poli <invernomuto@paranoici.org>

To: owner@bugs.debian.org

Cc: Debian Release Team <debian-release@lists.debian.org>, 830267@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Re: Bug#830267: dpkg: Segmentation fault when purging package in APT test case

Date: Sun, 24 Jul 2016 19:06:28 +0200

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

On Sun, 24 Jul 2016 11:43:19 -0500 Don Armstrong wrote:

[...]
> I'll try to check out snapshots
> later this week to see if I can figure out when the transition actually
> happened, or if there was something else going on in the archive to
> explain it.

Thanks for your help!
Please keep us informed, as the investigations go on.

Bye.

-- 
 http://www.inventati.org/frx/
 There's not a second to spare! To the laboratory!
..................................................... Francesco Poli .
 GnuPG key fpr == CA01 1147 9CD2 EFDF FB82  3925 3E1C 27E1 1F69 BFFE

[Message part 2 (application/pgp-signature, inline)]

Message #55 received at 830267@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Andreas Beckmann <anbe@debian.org>

To: 830267@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Re: Bug#830267: dpkg: Segmentation fault when purging package in APT test case

Date: Sun, 24 Jul 2016 22:31:18 +0200

Hi,

I think I've also seen this segfault in a spurious piuparts failure
(package: xrdp, upgrade: jessie -> sid). So the bug is out in the wild,
not only in a testsuite. Luckily I saw the debian-release@ discussion
about it before digging deeper into the piuparts failure.


Andreas

Message #60 received at 830267@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Francesco Poli <invernomuto@paranoici.org>

To: Guillem Jover <guillem@debian.org>, 830267@bugs.debian.org

Cc: Julian Andres Klode <jak@debian.org>

Subject: Re: Bug#830267: dpkg: Segmentation fault when purging package in APT test case

Date: Sat, 30 Jul 2016 13:07:43 +0200

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

On Sun, 24 Jul 2016 12:20:16 +0200 Francesco Poli wrote:

[...]
> Hello Guillem,
> I see that this serious bug has been pending since July the 7th.
> I thought dpkg/1.18.10 was going to be uploaded to unstable very soon
> after having found the fix for this regression, but apparently
> something went wrong.
> 
> In the meanwhile, dpkg/1.18.9 managed to migrate to testing
[...]
> 
> Dear Guillem, could you please clarify the status of this bug?


Guillem, are there any reasons why dpkg/1.18.10 has not yet been
finalized and uploaded to unstable?

It fixes this RC bug (#830267), which unfortunately currently also
affects testing. As a consequence, I think the upload should not be
delayed any further!

Please let me know.
Thanks for your time and dedication!


-- 
 http://www.inventati.org/frx/
 There's not a second to spare! To the laboratory!
..................................................... Francesco Poli .
 GnuPG key fpr == CA01 1147 9CD2 EFDF FB82  3925 3E1C 27E1 1F69 BFFE

[Message part 2 (application/pgp-signature, inline)]

Message #65 received at 830267-close@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Guillem Jover <guillem@debian.org>

To: 830267-close@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Bug#830267: fixed in dpkg 1.18.10

Date: Sun, 31 Jul 2016 16:34:22 +0000

Source: dpkg
Source-Version: 1.18.10

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.

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 830267@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@ftp-master.debian.org)


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA512

Format: 1.8
Date: Sun, 31 Jul 2016 12:57:02 +0200
Source: dpkg
Binary: libdpkg-dev dpkg dpkg-dev libdpkg-perl dselect
Architecture: source
Version: 1.18.10
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
 libdpkg-dev - Debian package management static library
 libdpkg-perl - Dpkg perl modules
Closes: 830267 832070 832179 832434
Changes:
 dpkg (1.18.10) unstable; urgency=medium
 .
   [ Guillem Jover ]
   * Fix a short-lived memory leak in dpkg archive argument parsing.
   * When activating file triggers on conffile purge, use the conffile name
     instead of the real pathname it might refer to. This fixes a segfault
     when using --instdir, or when the conffile has been moved around and
     replaced with a symlink to the target.
     Regression introduced in dpkg 1.18.8. Closes: #830267
   * Perl modules:
     - Disable fixdebugpath feature on unsafe characters in the path.
     - Generate reproducible source tarballs by using the new GNU tar
       --clamp-mtime option in Dpkg::Source::Archive, to make sure no file
       in source packages has an mtime later than the changelog entry time.
     - Enable fixdebugpath build flag feature by default.
       Thanks to Mattia Rizzolo <mattia@debian.org>. Closes: #832179
     - Rename various private methods and functions with an underscore prefix
       and unified names.
     - Refactor perl modules directory list into a new function in Test::Dpkg.
   * Test suite:
     - Add new POD coverage author test for public perl modules.
   * Documentation:
     - Document Testsuite-Triggers in dsc(5).
     - Fix deb-changes(5) description to talk about .changes instead of .dsc.
       Reported by HW42 <hw42@ipsumj.de>.
     - Use debian/control as the SYNOPSIS in deb-src-control(5).
     - Add new deb-conffiles(5) man page.
     - Add references to deb-control(5) and deb-triggers(5) in dpkg(1).
     - Fix typos for repeated “the” word.
       Prompted by Valentin Samir <valentin.samir@crans.org> in #830989.
     - Fix misspelled -fdebug-prefix-map flag in dpkg-buildflags(1).
       Reported by Mattia Rizzolo <mattia@debian.org>.
     - Remove mention of source format 1.0 supporting building with upstream
       tarball signatures from dpkg-source(1), as this was disabled in 1.18.8.
     - Document all public methods in Dpkg::Changelog::Entry::Debian.
     - Escape dashes in deb-changes(5) and dsc(5) man pages.
     - Fix typos in dpkg-shlibdeps(1). Closes: #832434
       Thanks to Carsten Leonhardt <leo@debian.org>.
 .
   [ Updated programs translations ]
   * German (Sven Joachim).
   * Turkish (Mert Dirik). Closes: #832070
 .
   [ Updated scripts translations ]
   * German (Helge Kreutzmann).
 .
   [ Updated manpages translations ]
   * German (Helge Kreutzmann).
Checksums-Sha1:
 344be66d01da2200efca4079f08e9594fc7dcc8e 2030 dpkg_1.18.10.dsc
 10ce6a921ba577c01b4ff094122b5386886acf2f 4645448 dpkg_1.18.10.tar.xz
Checksums-Sha256:
 c80b88e0b0293f0524978dc4526927b5e68bc0636c260c594ed1fb8c41859d91 2030 dpkg_1.18.10.dsc
 025524da41ba18b183ff11e388eb8686f7cc58ee835ed7d48bd159c46a8b6dc5 4645448 dpkg_1.18.10.tar.xz
Files:
 dc71ef66d980b71c9caf0de3618741e0 2030 admin required dpkg_1.18.10.dsc
 ccff17730c0964428fc186ded2f2f401 4645448 admin required dpkg_1.18.10.tar.xz

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2
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=eYqb
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Send a report that this bug log contains spam.