From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from gate001.proxmox.com (gate001.proxmox.com [45.144.208.40]) by lore.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 956481FF0B7 for ; Fri, 02 Oct 2026 10:48:52 +0200 (CEST) Received: from gate001.proxmox.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by gate001.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 4F83E21617; Fri, 02 Oct 2026 10:48:52 +0200 (CEST) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Date: Fri, 02 Oct 2026 10:48:48 +0200 Message-Id: From: "Lukas Wagner" To: "Erik Fastermann" , , Subject: applied: [PATCH proxmox-datacenter-manager v2 2/2] fix #7746: cli: admin: show installed instead of candidate version X-Mailer: aerc 0.21.0-0-g5549850facc2-dirty References: <20261002071000.131772-1-e.fastermann@proxmox.com> <20261002071000.131772-3-e.fastermann@proxmox.com> In-Reply-To: <20261002071000.131772-3-e.fastermann@proxmox.com> X-Bm-Milter-Handled: 55990f41-d878-4baa-be0a-ee34c49e34d2 X-Bm-Transport-Timestamp: 1790930928675 X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL 0.394 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address DMARC_MISSING 0.1 Missing DMARC policy KAM_DMARC_STATUS 0.01 Test Rule for DKIM or SPF Failure with Strict Alignment (newer systems) RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED -2.3 Sender listed at https://www.dnswl.org/, medium trust SPF_HELO_NONE 0.001 SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record SPF_PASS -0.001 SPF: sender matches SPF record Message-ID-Hash: CFUMY45FSZ4KIA6D5WYCKCYQMIT72NY3 X-Message-ID-Hash: CFUMY45FSZ4KIA6D5WYCKCYQMIT72NY3 X-MailFrom: l.wagner@proxmox.com X-Mailman-Rule-Misses: dmarc-mitigation; no-senders; approved; loop; banned-address; emergency; member-moderation; nonmember-moderation; administrivia; implicit-dest; max-recipients; max-size; news-moderation; no-subject; digests; suspicious-header X-Mailman-Version: 3.3.10 Precedence: list List-Id: Proxmox Backup Server development discussion List-Help: List-Owner: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: On Fri Oct 2, 2026 at 9:10 AM CEST, Erik Fastermann wrote: > The 'versions' command printed 'Version' from the API result, which > carries the version apt would upgrade to, not the one that is > installed. Whenever the apt cache knows a newer version, the command > therefore reported a version that is not installed at all, and the > output changed after a plain 'apt update'. This also affects the > 'report' command, which runs 'versions --verbose'. > > The installed version is available as 'OldVersion', which is what the > GUI reads as well. The name is unfortunate for a listing of installed > packages, but as far as I can tell every other consumer uses it > correctly. The only exceptions were this command and its equivalent in > Proxmox Backup Server, which is fixed in a separate patch. > > Use a renderer for the column, as 'OldVersion' is not set for packages > that are not installed, where the table would otherwise show an empty > cell instead of 'unknown', matching the previous behavior. > > The header is not shown while 'noborder' is set, as the table formatter > then suppresses headers as well. Still label it 'Version' rather than > 'Old Version', as from the user's point of view it is the current > version, and the label stays correct should the borders ever be enabled. > > The naming is inherited from PVE, where the same record is used for > both the available updates and the installed package listing. Giving > the versions endpoint its own type would avoid the trap for future > callers, but that is a more complex API change and can be done in a > future commit. > > Reviewed-by: Christian Ebner > Tested-by: Christian Ebner > Signed-off-by: Erik Fastermann applied the PDM patch, thanks!