<html><head></head><body> <div class="gmail_quote">On November 1, 2016 3:47:54 AM EDT, Volker Wysk <post@volker-wysk.de> wrote:<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); padding-left: 1ex;"> <pre class="k9mail">Am Montag, 31. Oktober 2016, 14:52:32 CET schrieb Clay Weber: <blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 1ex 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid #729fcf; padding-left: 1ex;"> The ppa is not empty, it does not provide packages for each and every Ubuntu release. Many PPAs do not. </blockquote> Yes, that's what I meant to say. It's "empty" for my release (Xenial). <blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 1ex 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid #729fcf; padding-left: 1ex;"> Probably the place to add the bug, or rather a feature request, on the script would be to file it against software-properties-common, which is the package that provides the add-apt-repository script. </blockquote> I think, it would rather be the package "apt", which contains the "apt" and "apt-get" commands, which fail on "apt update". I'll file the bug report for "apt" - if ubuntu-bug works... Bye, V.W. </pre></blockquote></div> As mentioned, it is the add-apt-repository script that does not check to see if there are any relevant packages in a given ppa before adding it to your software sources. Apt itself has nothing to do with this as it is not the tool being used to modify your software sources. software-sources-common *is* the correct package to file a bug report against. <a href="http://packages.ubuntu.com/xenial/all/software-properties-common/filelist">http://packages.ubuntu.com/xenial/all/software-properties-common/filelist</a> -- Clay Weber <a href="http://claydoh.com">http://claydoh.com</a> <a href="http://kubuntu.org">http://kubuntu.org</a> <a href="http://kubuntuforums.net">http://kubuntuforums.net</a></body></html>