Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > linux.debian.user > #190877 > unrolled thread

Why was this package removed but apt?

Back to article view | Back to linux.debian.user

Contents

  Why was this package removed but apt? Jonathan Sélea <jonathan@selea.se> - 2018-01-10 11:30 +0100
    Re: Why was this package removed but apt? Jonathan Dowland <jmtd@debian.org> - 2018-01-10 11:40 +0100
    Re: Why was this package removed but apt? <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2018-01-10 11:50 +0100
      Re: Why was this package removed but apt? Jonathan Sélea <jonathan@selea.se> - 2018-01-10 12:10 +0100
        Re: Why was this package removed but apt? <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2018-01-10 12:20 +0100
          Re: Why was this package removed but apt? Jonathan Sélea <jonathan@selea.se> - 2018-01-10 12:40 +0100
            Re: Why was this package removed but apt? MAS Jean-Louis <jean-louis.mas@imag.fr> - 2018-01-10 15:10 +0100
              Re: Why was this package removed but apt? Jonathan Sélea <jonathan@selea.se> - 2018-01-10 16:00 +0100
            Re: Why was this package removed but apt? Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> - 2018-01-11 15:20 +0100
              Re: Why was this package removed but apt? Jonathan Sélea <jonathan@selea.se> - 2018-01-11 16:30 +0100
                Re: Why was this package removed but apt? Jonathan Sélea <jonathan@selea.se> - 2018-01-12 10:10 +0100
                  Re: Why was this package removed but apt? David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2018-01-12 16:40 +0100

#190877 — Why was this package removed but apt?

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

Good morning,

I am trying to figure out why apt did remove this particular package 
when unattended-upgrade ran a couple of days ago:


Start-Date: 2018-01-06 06:43:44
Commandline: /usr/bin/unattended-upgrade Remove: php7.1-mbstring:amd64 
(7.1.13-1+0~20180105151623.14+stretch~1.gbp1086fa)
End-Date: 2018-01-06 06:43:50



Does someone have any pointers where I can look?

Thanks! / Jonathan

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#190878

Hi!

On Wed, 2018-01-10 at 11:17 +0100, Jonathan Sélea wrote:
> I am trying to figure out why apt did remove this particular package 
> when unattended-upgrade ran a couple of days ago:

The most likely explanation is that it was automatically-installed as a
dependency of another package, and an update to that other package has
removed the dependency. But I'm only guessing: it would be nice if
unattended-upgrades documented the rationale more.

You could look at "apt rdepends php7.1-mbstring" and see if you have
any of the packages installed, and if any of those were updated at the
same time.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#190882

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Wed, Jan 10, 2018 at 11:17:50AM +0100, Jonathan Sélea wrote:
> Good morning,
> 
> I am trying to figure out why apt did remove this particular package
> when unattended-upgrade ran a couple of days ago:
> 
> 
> Start-Date: 2018-01-06 06:43:44
> Commandline: /usr/bin/unattended-upgrade Remove:
> php7.1-mbstring:amd64

Hum: which distro are you running? I'm asking this, because...

> (7.1.13-1+0~20180105151623.14+stretch~1.gbp1086fa)
> End-Date: 2018-01-06 06:43:50

...I read "stretch" above, but stretch "only" has php7.0-mbstring
(7.1 is in buster(testing) or sid(unstable) but not on stretch).

So my crystal ball says you're using a backport or a non-official
repository. This isn't an infraction per se (free software is made
to hack on, after all :-) but stating that might help debugging
things.

Cheers
- -- tomás
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux)

iEYEARECAAYFAlpV7dcACgkQBcgs9XrR2kbWlACeOjKCcObd80EpwBXmvUy0/UK8
HIIAnAzeVaWmdWmkY+NIwL3pIqQ/kQWd
=KdCF
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#190883

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

Hi

I am running Debian Stretch but with sury.org repository. :)

Jonathan Download suggested that I checked what package is depending php7.1-mbstring  on with:

apt rdepends php7.1-mbstring

php7.1-mbstring

Reverse Depends:
   Depends:

php7.1-mbstring-dbgsym (= 7.1.13-1+0~20180105151623.14+stretch~1.gbp1086fa)

That particular package was not installed thou.

/ Jonathan




On 01/10/2018 11:41 AM, tomas@tuxteam.de wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On Wed, Jan 10, 2018 at 11:17:50AM +0100, Jonathan Sélea wrote:
>> Good morning,
>>
>> I am trying to figure out why apt did remove this particular package
>> when unattended-upgrade ran a couple of days ago:
>>
>>
>> Start-Date: 2018-01-06 06:43:44
>> Commandline: /usr/bin/unattended-upgrade Remove:
>> php7.1-mbstring:amd64
> Hum: which distro are you running? I'm asking this, because...
>
>> (7.1.13-1+0~20180105151623.14+stretch~1.gbp1086fa)
>> End-Date: 2018-01-06 06:43:50
> ...I read "stretch" above, but stretch "only" has php7.0-mbstring
> (7.1 is in buster(testing) or sid(unstable) but not on stretch).
>
> So my crystal ball says you're using a backport or a non-official
> repository. This isn't an infraction per se (free software is made
> to hack on, after all :-) but stating that might help debugging
> things.
>
> Cheers
> - -- tomás
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux)
>
> iEYEARECAAYFAlpV7dcACgkQBcgs9XrR2kbWlACeOjKCcObd80EpwBXmvUy0/UK8
> HIIAnAzeVaWmdWmkY+NIwL3pIqQ/kQWd
> =KdCF
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#190884

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Wed, Jan 10, 2018 at 12:01:50PM +0100, Jonathan Sélea wrote:
> Hi
> 
> I am running Debian Stretch but with sury.org repository. :)
> 
> Jonathan Download suggested that I checked what package is depending php7.1-mbstring  on with:
> 
> apt rdepends php7.1-mbstring
> 
> php7.1-mbstring
> 
> Reverse Depends:
>   Depends:
> 
> php7.1-mbstring-dbgsym (= 7.1.13-1+0~20180105151623.14+stretch~1.gbp1086fa)
> 
> That particular package was not installed thou.

Then things depend (heh, pun :) on how the upgrade was made. If that package
doesn't depend on anything and it was automatically installed, it may well
be (depending on configuration, somewhere in /etc/apt) that it gets automatically
removed when not needed anymore. The question is... why was it installed in
the first place?

Perhaps you find a hint somewhere in /var/log/apt/term.log

Cheers
- -- tomás
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux)

iEYEARECAAYFAlpV9n4ACgkQBcgs9XrR2kbP+QCeMVzcvSTgnUAlhZoMeX45t7oq
NPoAnA3XSZ4r/6N22EhneAaKZRdwjBvP
=IVds
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#190885

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

It was installed because CraftCMS depends on it :)

According to term.log - unattended-upgrade performed the update 
2018-01-06 06:41 and every package was updated (including php7.1-mbstring)

Just two minutes after that, unattended-upgrade runs again and removes 
php7.1-mbstring and only that package.
I can't find any activity on the server on that time (no users logged in 
and such).

So something triggered unattended-upgrade to do this,

hmm


/ Jonathan


On 01/10/2018 12:18 PM, tomas@tuxteam.de wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On Wed, Jan 10, 2018 at 12:01:50PM +0100, Jonathan Sélea wrote:
>> Hi
>>
>> I am running Debian Stretch but with sury.org repository. :)
>>
>> Jonathan Downland suggested that I checked what package is depending php7.1-mbstring  on with:
>>
>> apt rdepends php7.1-mbstring
>>
>> php7.1-mbstring
>>
>> Reverse Depends:
>>    Depends:
>>
>> php7.1-mbstring-dbgsym (= 7.1.13-1+0~20180105151623.14+stretch~1.gbp1086fa)
>>
>> That particular package was not installed thou.
> Then things depend (heh, pun :) on how the upgrade was made. If that package
> doesn't depend on anything and it was automatically installed, it may well
> be (depending on configuration, somewhere in /etc/apt) that it gets automatically
> removed when not needed anymore. The question is... why was it installed in
> the first place?
>
> Perhaps you find a hint somewhere in /var/log/apt/term.log
>
> Cheers
> - -- tomás
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux)
>
> iEYEARECAAYFAlpV9n4ACgkQBcgs9XrR2kbP+QCeMVzcvSTgnUAlhZoMeX45t7oq
> NPoAnA3XSZ4r/6N22EhneAaKZRdwjBvP
> =IVds
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#190894

Le 10/01/2018 à 12:30, Jonathan Sélea a écrit :
> It was installed because CraftCMS depends on it :)
> 
> According to term.log - unattended-upgrade performed the update
> 2018-01-06 06:41 and every package was updated (including php7.1-mbstring)
> 
> Just two minutes after that, unattended-upgrade runs again and removes
> php7.1-mbstring and only that package.
> I can't find any activity on the server on that time (no users logged in
> and such).
> 
> So something triggered unattended-upgrade to do this,

Maybe this line is set to "true" in your
/etc/apt/apt.conf.d/50unattended-upgrades

Mine look like this :
// Do automatic removal of new unused dependencies after the upgrade
// (equivalent to apt-get autoremove)
Unattended-Upgrade::Remove-Unused-Dependencies "false";


Regards

-- 
Jean Louis Mas
Also struggling with unattended-upgrades ;-)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#190897

On 2018-01-10 14:58, MAS Jean-Louis wrote:
> Le 10/01/2018 à 12:30, Jonathan Sélea a écrit :
>> It was installed because CraftCMS depends on it :)
>> 
>> According to term.log - unattended-upgrade performed the update
>> 2018-01-06 06:41 and every package was updated (including 
>> php7.1-mbstring)
>> 
>> Just two minutes after that, unattended-upgrade runs again and removes
>> php7.1-mbstring and only that package.
>> I can't find any activity on the server on that time (no users logged 
>> in
>> and such).
>> 
>> So something triggered unattended-upgrade to do this,
> 
> Maybe this line is set to "true" in your
> /etc/apt/apt.conf.d/50unattended-upgrades
> 
> Mine look like this :
> // Do automatic removal of new unused dependencies after the upgrade
> // (equivalent to apt-get autoremove)
> Unattended-Upgrade::Remove-Unused-Dependencies "false";
> 

Thanks!
My file looks like this:

Unattended-Upgrade::Origins-Pattern {
         "o=*";
};
Unattended-Upgrade::Automatic-Reboot "false";
Unattended-Upgrade::Mail "root";

I appended "Unattended-Upgrade::Remove-Unused-Dependencies "false";" to 
the end of the file. Let's hope that this does not happend again :)

Thanks for the tip!

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#190935

> It was installed because CraftCMS depends on it :)

Care to give some details?  E.g. *how* was it installed, then?
IIUC your system needs it, so the removal caused some breakage (which
is why you noticed the issue).

Normally APT only auto-removes packages which are marked as
"automatically installed" (i.e. installed because they are required by
some other package rather than because the user explicitly asked to
installed this package), so how come that package was installed and
marked as "automatically installed" even though there were apparently no
other package that was marked as requiring it.


        Stefan

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#190938

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

Well, it was removed by unattended-upgrades according to term.log and 
apt.log :)

/ Jonathan


On 01/11/2018 03:35 PM, Stefan Monnier wrote:
>> It was installed manually by me:
>> apt install php7.1-mbstring
>> So I "explicitly asked" apt to install that package actually.
> So now the question is why/how did this package end up marked
> "automatically installed" (or if it wasn't, why did unattended-upgrades
> remove it even tho it wasn't marked as automatically-installed; tho this
> would most likely be a bug in unattended-upgrades and I think such a bug
> is rather unlikely at this stage).
>
>
>          Stefan

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#190971

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

Hi again,

A quick update:

It seems like

Unattended-Upgrade::Remove-Unused-Dependencies "false";

Is not "false" by default but indeed true in unattended-upgrades on 
Debian 9 (stretch)
Am I wrong about that?

/ Jonathan



On 01/11/18 16:27, Jonathan Sélea wrote:
> Well, it was removed by unattended-upgrades according to term.log and 
> apt.log :)
>
> / Jonathan
>
>
> On 01/11/2018 03:35 PM, Stefan Monnier wrote:
>>> It was installed manually by me:
>>> apt install php7.1-mbstring
>>> So I "explicitly asked" apt to install that package actually.
>> So now the question is why/how did this package end up marked
>> "automatically installed" (or if it wasn't, why did unattended-upgrades
>> remove it even tho it wasn't marked as automatically-installed; tho this
>> would most likely be a bug in unattended-upgrades and I think such a bug
>> is rather unlikely at this stage).
>>
>>
>>          Stefan
>
>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#190990

On Fri 12 Jan 2018 at 10:04:52 (+0100), Jonathan Sélea wrote:

> It seems like
> 
> Unattended-Upgrade::Remove-Unused-Dependencies "false";
> 
> Is not "false" by default but indeed true in unattended-upgrades on
> Debian 9 (stretch)
> Am I wrong about that?

--✄--------

* `Unattended-Upgrade::Remove-Unused-Dependencies` - boolean (default:False)

 Remove all unused dependencies after the upgrade finished.

* `Unattended-Upgrade::Remove-New-Unused-Dependencies` - boolean (default:True)

 Remove any new unused dependencies after the upgrade finished.

--✄--------

Perhaps the latter occurred.

> On 01/11/18 16:27, Jonathan Sélea wrote:
> >Well, it was removed by unattended-upgrades according to term.log
> >and apt.log :)
> >
> >/ Jonathan
> >
> >
> >On 01/11/2018 03:35 PM, Stefan Monnier wrote:
> >>>It was installed manually by me:
> >>>apt install php7.1-mbstring
> >>>So I "explicitly asked" apt to install that package actually.
> >>So now the question is why/how did this package end up marked
> >>"automatically installed" (or if it wasn't, why did unattended-upgrades
> >>remove it even tho it wasn't marked as automatically-installed; tho this
> >>would most likely be a bug in unattended-upgrades and I think such a bug
> >>is rather unlikely at this stage).

Cheers,
David.

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | linux.debian.user

csiph-web