#539785 cowbuilder: Option to continue update, even if some packages aren't available

Package:
cowbuilder
Source:
cowdancer
Description:
pbuilder running on cowdancer
Submitter:
"Nelson A. de Oliveira"
Date:
2015-11-03 08:48:05 UTC
Severity:
wishlist
#539785#5
Date:
2009-08-03 16:20:28 UTC
From:
To:
Hi!

Is it possible to have some option to continue the update process of a
cowbuilder chroot, even if not all the package updates are available, please?

For example, trying to update my chroot right now I get this:

=====
The following packages have been kept back:
  apt apt-utils
The following packages will be upgraded:
  dash libldap-2.4-2 libncurses5 libncursesw5 libtasn1-3 libxapian15
  linux-libc-dev makedev mawk ncurses-base ncurses-bin sed vim-common vim-tiny
(...)
Some packages could not be installed. This may mean that you have
requested an impossible situation or if you are using the unstable
distribution that some required packages have not yet been created
or been moved out of Incoming.
The following information may help to resolve the situation:

The following packages have unmet dependencies:
  aptitude: Depends: libapt-pkg-libc6.9-6-4.7
  libept0: Depends: libapt-pkg-libc6.9-6-4.7
E: Broken packages
I: Copying back the cached apt archive contents
I: unmounting dev/pts filesystem
I: unmounting proc filesystem
pbuilder update failed
E: could not update with cowdancer, try --no-cowdancer-update option
  forking: rm -rf /var/cache/pbuilder/build//cow.19772
=====

The full log is attached.

It's possible to see that it has updated some packages, with only two unable
to be updated.
The option (that won't be enabled by default) would save the chroot in this
state, instead giving an error.
While it's not so common to have some packages uninstallable, I think that
having a chroot with only two missing packages is better than having a
chroot with more packages outdated.
And to avoid unexpected results, the option should be disabled by default
(so the user should be aware of what he is doing and that it can has
undesired effects).

Thank you very much!

Best regards,
Nelson

#539785#10
Date:
2009-08-04 14:20:42 UTC
From:
To:
I'd rather get those packages fixed fast.

At Mon, 03 Aug 2009 13:20:28 -0300,
Nelson A. de Oliveira wrote: