apt-get / mach problems

[Panu Matilainen]

On Tue, 2004-03-02 at 20:17, Erik LaBianca wrote:
> > 
> > [erik at mises SPECS]$ sudo apt-get install 'perl(Digest::SHA1)'
> > 'perl(Digest::Nilsimsa)'
> > Reading Package Lists... Done
> > Building Dependency Tree... Done
> > Selecting perl-Digest-SHA1 for 'perl(Digest::SHA1)'
> > Package perl(Digest::Nilsimsa) is a virtual package provided by:
> >   perl-Digest-Nilsimsa 0:0.06-0.fdr.4.1
> > You should explicitly select one to install.
> > E: Package perl(Digest::Nilsimsa) has no installation candidate
> > 
> >
> 
> Ok, I've found another (maybe easily fixed) bug on the apt-get side
> things.
> 
> [root at mises root]# apt-get install perl-Digest-Nilsimsa
> Reading Package Lists... Done
> Building Dependency Tree... Done
> The following NEW packages will be installed:
>    perl-Digest-Nilsimsa (0.06-0.fdr.4.1)
> 0 upgraded, 1 newly installed, 0 removed and 0 not upgraded.
> Need to get 0B/26.1kB of archives.
> After unpacking 47.8kB of additional disk space will be used.
> Checking GPG signatures...
> Committing changes...
> Preparing...                ###########################################
> [100%]
>    1:perl-Digest-Nilsimsa   ###########################################
> [100%]
> Done.
> 
> [root at mises root]# apt-get install 'perl(Digest::Nilsimsa)'
> Reading Package Lists... Done
> Building Dependency Tree... Done
> Package perl(Digest::Nilsimsa) is a virtual package provided by:
>   perl-Digest-Nilsimsa 0:0.06-0.fdr.4.1
> You should explicitly select one to install.
> E: Package perl(Digest::Nilsimsa) has no installation candidate
> 
> [root at mises root]# rpm -q --whatprovides 'perl(Digest::Nilsimsa)'
> perl-Digest-Nilsimsa-0.06-0.fdr.4.1
> 
> What's happening here is that apt isn't checking rpm for a whatprovides
> before it tries to do the install. This wouldn't be a problem, IF the
> virtual provides resolution worked properly in all cases, but since it
> doesn't, apt-get fails when asked to install bugged virtual provides,
> even if there is something installed satisfying the dependency.
> 
> Not sure if this portion of the problem is really an apt bug or not,
> it's easy enough to workaround by manually checking provides first.

It's a bug in apt alright, but not quite what you think. There is code
in apt-get which should handle this case but something in the lower
level stuff causes the code to fail. Need to dig deeper...

	- Panu -