> Well trying to run get_file_package() before install_packages() didn't work out to well.
> NotImplementedError: Cannot map DistroRelease to a code name without install_packages()
Indeed, as without a config directory we can't map something like "Ubuntu 15.04" to "wily", which we need to download the matching Contents.gz.
I turned the warning into a fatal, which should already help: http://bazaar.launchpad.net/~apport-hackers/apport/trunk/revision/2997 . This should be okay, as realistically the first apport.packaging.install_packages() call does not really do anything (unless you specified extra_packages), as we usually have ProcMaps available in reports and thus use the needed_runtime_packages() pass to install only the packages we need instead of all Packages: plus Dependencies:. So I think any additional potential speedup by reordering things should be miniscule, especially since (hopefully) an unknown ExecutablePath isn't the common case?
> Well trying to run get_file_package() before install_packages() didn't work out to well. rror: Cannot map DistroRelease to a code name without install_packages()
> NotImplementedE
Indeed, as without a config directory we can't map something like "Ubuntu 15.04" to "wily", which we need to download the matching Contents.gz.
I turned the warning into a fatal, which should already help: http:// bazaar. launchpad. net/~apport- hackers/ apport/ trunk/revision/ 2997 . This should be okay, as realistically the first apport. packaging. install_ packages( ) call does not really do anything (unless you specified extra_packages), as we usually have ProcMaps available in reports and thus use the needed_ runtime_ packages( ) pass to install only the packages we need instead of all Packages: plus Dependencies:. So I think any additional potential speedup by reordering things should be miniscule, especially since (hopefully) an unknown ExecutablePath isn't the common case?