Bug#712635: [apt] apt-cache show $packagename spits error on telepathy packages
On Fri, Jul 26, 2013 at 3:06 PM, Thomas Hackert <thackert@nexgo.de> wrote:
> Hello David, *,
> On Fri, Jul 26, 2013 at 11:13:20AM +0200, David Kalnischkies wrote:
>> On Tue, Jun 18, 2013 at 9:15 AM, Thomas Hackert <thackert@nexgo.de> wrote:
>> > . When I try this with telepathy-haze (but also with telepathy-gabble or
>> > -rakia) I get only the message
>> > <quote>
>> > E: Handler silently failed
>> > </quote>
>> >
>> > ... :( I am not sure, if this is really a bug in apt and/or a bug in
>> > these packages. If I am wrong here, it would be nice someone could
>> > reassign it to the right package ... ;)
>> > Sorry for the inconvenience
>> > Thomas.
>>
>> Thanks for the report, but while I tried for a while to reproduce this I seem
>> to be unable to do so. Usually our bugscript would have attached config
>> and sources which might help to identify what is going on here.
>
> did you try
> <quote>
> apt-cache show telepathy-haze
> </quote>
> ? I still get this error ... :(
mhh. I tried "apt-cache show telepathy-haze" and it has all the usual
output and just to be sure I tried it again and all fine in my de local as
well as with LANG=C or anything else I could come up with.
Can you post the output of "apt-config dump" and attach your
/etc/apt/sources.list(.d/) files?
Usually reportbug should have asked you to do that (or even asked you
if it is allowed to do that automatically).
>> But it would also be nice if you could try current unstable versions as they
>> introduce some changes to the 'show' code, which might have fixed this
>> as a by-product.
>
> Which "unstable versions" do you mean? From apt and its dependencies?
> Have a nice day
I mean apt and libapt-* from "Debian unstable", but we are not in a hurry and
I don't want to suggest adding this repository if you haven't configured it,
just misread the versionnumber and thought you were an unstable user already.
The new version should be in "Debian testing" in a couple of days as well.
Best regards
David Kalnischkies
Reply to: