[Aptitude-devel] Bug#490547: aptitude: safe-upgrade selectively clears 'automatic' flags

[Manuel A. Fernandez Montecelo]

Control: tags -1 + moreinfo

(sorry for repeating, re-resending with the correct bug number now)

Hi,

2008-07-11 09:28 Rune Kock:
>stavanger:/home/rune# aptitude --version
>aptitude 0.4.11.8 compiled at Jul  4 2008 17:26:43
>Compiler: g++ 4.3.1
>Compiled against:
>  apt version 4.6.0
>  NCurses version 5.6
>  libsigc++ version: 2.0.18
>  Ept support enabled.
>
>Current library versions:
>  NCurses version: ncurses 5.6.20080621
>  cwidget version: 0.5.12
>  Apt version: 4.6.0
>
>
>stavanger:/home/rune# aptitude markauto knewsticker kopete kppp krdc
>krfb kscd kscreensaver kscreensaver-xsavers xscreensaver-data
>xscreensaver-data-extra libvncserver0 libotr2 ppp
>
>stavanger:/home/rune# aptitude -t experimental safe-upgrade
>Reading package lists... Done
>Building dependency tree
>Reading state information... Done
>Reading extended state information
>Initializing package states... Done
>Resolving dependencies...
>Resolving dependencies...
>[repeated about 50 times]
>Resolving dependencies...
>Resolving dependencies...
>The following packages have been kept back:
>  kdeartwork{a} kdemultimedia{a} kdenetwork{a} kdeplasmoids-data
>libgtk2.0-bin{a} xserver-xorg-core{a}
>0 packages upgraded, 0 newly installed, 0 to remove and 6 not upgraded.
>Need to get 0B of archives. After unpacking 0B will be used.
>Writing extended state information... Done
>Reading package lists... Done
>Building dependency tree
>Reading state information... Done
>Reading extended state information
>Initializing package states... Done
>
>
>Result: the packages that I just marked as auto are changed to manual.
> And aptitude didn't even do any real work!

Sorry that this report was unattended for so long.

Did you experience this in recent times, with examples of packages that
you can share?

I think that some changes happened in 0.6 series that might have
addressed this when installing new packages.  Otherwise I think that
this might be a manifestation of #613775 or #638049.


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