Debian Bug report logs - #8294
dpkg: Packages with epochs make old Debian installations not upgradable

Toggle useless messages

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

From: Christoph Lameter <clameter@waterf.org>

To: clameter@debian.org, submit@bugs.debian.org

Subject: dpkg: Packages with epochs make old Debian installations not upgradable

Date: Mon, 24 Mar 1997 13:47:17 -0800

Package: dpkg
Version: 1.2.11elf

After updating the available database dpkg always fails with the following message:

# dpkg -s dpkg
dpkg: parse error, in file /var/lib/dpkg/available' near line 22301 package
'sharutils':
 empty value for version

sharutils is a package using epochs for the version number.

I tried to:

1. Install a new dpkg using dpkg -> same error message

2. Got dpkg-nondebbin from experimental and unpacked it in the /root
directory. Then tried to execute /root/usr/bin/dpkg. Result:

# /root/usr/bin/dpkg -s dpkg
./dpkg: can't resolve symbol 'sysinfo'

How will a debian 1.1 system be upgradable to the next release?

Message #10 received at 8294@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: "Scott K. Ellis" <storm@anexis.com>

To: 8294@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Re: dpkg: Packages with epochs make old Debian installations not upgradable

Date: Tue, 25 Mar 1997 10:32:10 -0500

> After updating the available database dpkg always fails with the following message:
> 
> # dpkg -s dpkg
> dpkg: parse error, in file /var/lib/dpkg/available' near line 22301 package
> 'sharutils':
>  empty value for version
> 
> sharutils is a package using epochs for the version number.
> 
> I tried to:
> 
> 1. Install a new dpkg using dpkg -> same error message
> 
> 2. Got dpkg-nondebbin from experimental and unpacked it in the /root
> directory. Then tried to execute /root/usr/bin/dpkg. Result:
> 
> # /root/usr/bin/dpkg -s dpkg
> ./dpkg: can't resolve symbol 'sysinfo'
> 
> How will a debian 1.1 system be upgradable to the next release?

dpkg --clear-avail
dpkg -I dpkg_1.4.0.8.deb

Message #15 received at 8294@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Christian Schwarz <schwarz@monet.m.isar.de>

To: "Scott K. Ellis" <storm@anexis.com>, 8294@bugs.debian.org

Cc: Debian Development <debian-devel@lists.debian.org>

Subject: Re: Bug#8294: dpkg: Packages with epochs make old Debian installations not upgradable

Date: Tue, 25 Mar 1997 20:46:22 +0100 (MET)

On Tue, 25 Mar 1997, Scott K. Ellis wrote:

> > After updating the available database dpkg always fails with the following message:
> > 
> > # dpkg -s dpkg
> > dpkg: parse error, in file /var/lib/dpkg/available' near line 22301 package
> > 'sharutils':
> >  empty value for version
> > 
> > sharutils is a package using epochs for the version number.
> > 
> > I tried to:
> > 
> > 1. Install a new dpkg using dpkg -> same error message
> > 
> > 2. Got dpkg-nondebbin from experimental and unpacked it in the /root
> > directory. Then tried to execute /root/usr/bin/dpkg. Result:
> > 
> > # /root/usr/bin/dpkg -s dpkg
> > ./dpkg: can't resolve symbol 'sysinfo'
> > 
> > How will a debian 1.1 system be upgradable to the next release?
> 
> dpkg --clear-avail
> dpkg -I dpkg_1.4.0.8.deb

Wouldn't it be better to change the few packages that use epochs so that
the old version of dpkg can handle it? IMHO most users would prefer it if
dpkg won't upgrade a single package (because its version number is
conseridered less than the installed one) instead of having to go through
this pain. (It's not much pain unless you know how to do it :-)

I used sgrep to get a list of packages using epochs:

Package: aout-svgalib
Package: svgalib1-bin
Package: svgalib1
Package: tf
Package: svgalib1-dev
Package: mailx
Package: bison
Package: zlib1
Package: sharutils
Package: zlib1-dev

(Perhaps someone could verify that I didn't miss a package.)


Thanks,

Chris

--                  Christian Schwarz
                   schwarz@monet.m.isar.de, schwarz@schwarz-online.com
                  schwarz@debian.org, schwarz@mathematik.tu-muenchen.de
                       
                PGP-fp: 8F 61 EB 6D CF 23 CA D7  34 05 14 5C C8 DC 22 BA
              
 CS Software goes online! Visit our new home page at
 	                                     http://www.schwarz-online.com

Message #20 received at 8294@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: storm@anexis.com

To: Christian Schwarz <schwarz@monet.m.isar.de>

Cc: 8294@bugs.debian.org, Debian Development <debian-devel@lists.debian.org>

Subject: Re: Bug#8294: dpkg: Packages with epochs make old Debian installations not upgradable

Date: Tue, 25 Mar 1997 15:27:28 -0500 (EST)

On Tue, 25 Mar 1997, Christian Schwarz wrote:
> Wouldn't it be better to change the few packages that use epochs so that
> the old version of dpkg can handle it? IMHO most users would prefer it if
> dpkg won't upgrade a single package (because its version number is
> conseridered less than the installed one) instead of having to go through
> this pain. (It's not much pain unless you know how to do it :-)

Versions of dpkg >= 1.4.0.7 should support epochs correctly.  The epoch
was created to allow packages with wierd numbering sequences to work
correctly, if you change packages, newer versions of dpkg won't recognise
that the newer (non-epoch) package is actually newer.

Message #25 received at 8294-submitter@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Cyrille Chepelov <chepelov@calixo.net>

To: 8294-submitter@bugs.debian.org

Cc: control@bugs.debian.org

Subject: is this still of any relevance ?

Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2001 20:06:00 +0200

tag 8294 moreinfo
thanks

Is this bug still of any relevance ? 
Is the workaround described there stored anywhere else for reference ? We have many more 
packages with epochs nowadays...

Will close in 2 weeks unless a problem arises.

	-- Cyrille

Message #30 received at 8294-done@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Christoph Lameter <christoph@lameter.com>

To: Josip Rodin <joy@cibalia.gkvk.hr>

Cc: <8294-done@bugs.debian.org>

Subject: Bug#8294: is this still of any relevance ?

Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2001 11:55:30 -0700 (PDT)

It's irrelevant like my old email address. I filed the bug in 1997!

On Wed, 25 Jul 2001, Josip Rodin wrote:

> ----- Forwarded message from Mail Delivery System <Mailer-Daemon@master.debian.org> -----
>
> Delivery-date: Wed, 25 Jul 2001 20:23:28 +0200
> X-Failed-Recipients: clameter@waterf.org
> From: Mail Delivery System <Mailer-Daemon@master.debian.org>
> To: owner@bugs.debian.org
> Subject: Mail delivery failed: returning message to sender
> Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2001 13:21:20 -0500
>
> This message was created automatically by mail delivery software.
>
> A message that you sent could not be delivered to one or more of its
> recipients. The following address(es) failed:
>
>   clameter@waterf.org:
>     unrouteable mail domain "waterf.org"
>
> ------ This is a copy of the message, including all the headers. ------
>
> Return-path: <owner@bugs.debian.org>
> Received: from gecko by master.debian.org with local (Exim 3.12 1 (Debian))
> 	id 15PTHW-0000FY-00; Wed, 25 Jul 2001 13:21:14 -0500
> Subject: Bug#8294: is this still of any relevance ?
> Reply-To: Cyrille Chepelov <chepelov@calixo.net>, 8294-quiet@bugs.debian.org
> Resent-To: Christoph Lameter <clameter@waterf.org>
> Resent-Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2001 18:21:12 GMT
> Resent-Message-ID: <handler.8294.U8294.99608437129956@bugs.debian.org>
> Resent-Sender: owner@bugs.debian.org
> X-Debian-PR-Message: report 8294
> X-Debian-PR-Package: dpkg
> X-Debian-PR-Keywords: moreinfo
> X-Loop: owner@bugs.debian.org
> Received: via spool by 8294-submitter@bugs.debian.org id=U8294.99608437129956
>           (code U ref 8294); Wed, 25 Jul 2001 18:21:12 GMT
> To: 8294-submitter@bugs.debian.org
> Cc: control@bugs.debian.org
> Message-Id: <E15PT2m-0004P8-00@muscat.nosuchdomain>
> From: Cyrille Chepelov <chepelov@calixo.net>
> Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2001 20:06:00 +0200
> Delivered-To: 8294-submitter@bugs.debian.org
> Resent-From: owner@bugs.debian.org
>
> tag 8294 moreinfo
> thanks
>
> Is this bug still of any relevance ?
> Is the workaround described there stored anywhere else for reference ? We have many more
> packages with epochs nowadays...
>
> Will close in 2 weeks unless a problem arises.
>
> 	-- Cyrille
>
>
>
> ----- End forwarded message -----
>
> --
> Digital Electronic Being Intended for Assassination and Nullification
>

Send a report that this bug log contains spam.