[Aptitude-devel] Bug#795396: Bug#795396: Bug#795396: aptitude: DEBIAN_FRONTEND does not affect the debconf invoked by "aptitude

[Manuel A. Fernandez Montecelo]

Hello Karl,

2015-09-06 20:12 Karl O. Pinc:
>Hi Manual,
>
>On Sun, 6 Sep 2015 16:15:56 +0100
>"Manuel A. Fernandez Montecelo" <manuel.montezelo at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Control: tags -1 + moreinfo
>
>> 2015-08-13 17:04 Karl O. Pinc:
>> >Package: aptitude
>> >Version: 0.6.11-1+b1
>> >Severity: normal
>
>> >export DEBIAN_FRONTEND=noninteractive
>> >aptitude --quiet=2 update
>> >aptitude --quiet=2 -o Dir::Etc::sourcelist=$tmpsources -y
>> >safe-upgrade
>> >
>> >Results in an interactive debconf session on jessie.  This was not
>> >the case on wheezy.  (Assuming of course the safe-upgrade results
>> >in a change that invokes debconf.)
>> >
>> >Debconf version: 1.5.56
>> >
>> >$ debconf-show debconf
>> >debconf: DbDriver "passwords" warning: could not
>> >open /var/cache/debconf/passwords.dat: Permission denied
>> >  debconf-apt-progress/info:
>> >* debconf/frontend: Readline
>> >  debconf-apt-progress/title:
>> >  debconf-apt-progress/preparing:
>> >  debconf-apt-progress/media-change:
>> >* debconf/priority: medium
>>
>> As far as I know, aptitude doesn't have any code handling this
>> variable or debconf directly.  Why do you think that it is a problem
>> in aptitude?
>
>Thanks for the reply.
>
>I don't know that it's a problem in aptitude (or what
>aptitude's code handles).  I reported the bug to aptitude
>because that the only code path I know for sure exhibits
>the bug.
>
>I figured you guys would have a better idea of what
>the source of the problem is than I do.  Feel free
>to reassign the bug to another package that is more
>appropriate.

I never used that feature of debconf, so I am not familiar at all with
it, sorry.


>> Also, what does happen if you use apt-get instead?
>
>I don't know.  It's not clear to me how to create
>a test environment to reproduce the problem.  It requires
>that an installed package get an update put into a repo
>and that the update makes changes to a user-modifed
>config file (right?) so that debconf is invoked when
>the update is installed.

Perhaps it also work installing some package that you don't need, but it
is harmless, and know for sure that uses debconf?


>I'm not apt-savvy enough just now to be able to re-create the
>problem on my own.  I'd be willing to try to reproduce
>the problem with apt-get but I'd need some help.  I
>haven't tried to research the problem but, offhand,
>I couldn't even give you a list of steps that would
>reach the goal.  My guess would be I'd have to learn
>how to create a .deb package, and maybe an apt repo.
>
>My hope was that by reporting the problem somebody
>with experience would magically step in and
>resolve the issue.  :-)  Please advise.

I could try to reproduce it, but as I said above, I never used it so I
don't know how it would look like, and even then I wouldn't know if it's
the problem that you observed.

If you cannot test with the suggestion above, I think that it's better
to reassign to debconf package itself, let me know if you want me to do
this.


Cheers.
-- 
Manuel A. Fernandez Montecelo <manuel.montezelo at gmail.com>