> I mentioned this in a previous email: the problem is if the upgrade
> breaks and the admin has to consult man pages to work out how to fix
> it.
> (I did just that less than an hour ago in another situation, so I
> don't
> think this is a theoretical concern.)
Another good point, thanks for
On Tue, Jun 23, 2020 at 01:39:29PM +0200, Michael Meskes wrote:
> Colin Watson wrote:
> > man would be broken between the end of step 1 and the end of step 5.
> > I think this is undesirable and unnecessary.
>
> Good points. However, I still don't see where this creates problems in
> the upgrade
> > Any idea how this scenario could unfold? I cannot imagine how it
> > could
> > get there. What I will do, though, is add a "Breaks: man-db
> > (<<2.9.3-
> > 1)" to bsdmainutils. Actually this is already in git.
>
> Breaks only ensures that new bsdmainutils can't be unpacked until
> man-db
>
On Tue, Jun 23, 2020 at 11:02:02AM +0200, Michael Meskes wrote:
> Colin Watson wrote:
> > However, in order to make buster → bullseye upgrades work properly,
> > I think it's necessary to have bsdmainutils depend on bsdextrautils
> > for at least one release cycle. Otherwise there may be a point
> However, in order to make buster → bullseye upgrades work properly, I
> think it's necessary to have bsdmainutils depend on bsdextrautils for
> at
> least one release cycle. Otherwise there may be a point during the
> upgrade where col isn't installed and so man will be broken; it's
> worth
>
On Mon, Jun 22, 2020 at 09:18:59PM +0100, Colin Watson wrote:
> I'm going to upload man-db with a dependency on bsdextrautils |
> bsdmainutils (<< 12.1.1~) shortly. (There's been a bit of a delay
> because of some unrelated po4a-induced breakage that I had to stop and
> fix upstream first.)
Done
On Mon, Jun 22, 2020 at 09:56:13PM +0200, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> On 22/06/20 at 21:35 +0200, Michael Meskes wrote:
> > The reason for this move is moving from the old and heavily patched BSD
> > source to the more up-to-date GNU version.
>
> I did a partial archive rebuild reverting to the
On 22/06/20 at 21:35 +0200, Michael Meskes wrote:
> On Mon, 2020-06-22 at 20:57 +0200, Julien Cristau wrote:
> > On Mon, Jun 22, 2020 at 19:46:21 +0200, Michael Meskes wrote:
> >
> > > > Depending on bsdmainutils to get col et al seems entirely right,
> > > > it's
> > > > been right forever,
On Mon, 2020-06-22 at 20:57 +0200, Julien Cristau wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 22, 2020 at 19:46:21 +0200, Michael Meskes wrote:
>
> > > Depending on bsdmainutils to get col et al seems entirely right,
> > > it's
> > > been right forever, there doesn't seem to be a reason to break
> > > that
> > > both
>
On Mon, Jun 22, 2020 at 19:46:21 +0200, Michael Meskes wrote:
> > Depending on bsdmainutils to get col et al seems entirely right, it's
> > been right forever, there doesn't seem to be a reason to break that
> > both
> > for dependent packages and for end users. Especially not without
> >
> Depending on bsdmainutils to get col et al seems entirely right, it's
> been right forever, there doesn't seem to be a reason to break that
> both
> for dependent packages and for end users. Especially not without
> notice.
There is no point arguing against your "do not change anything"
On Mon, Jun 22, 2020 at 19:04:49 +0200, Michael Meskes wrote:
> > I think it's probably best at this point to have bsdmainutils depend
> > on
> > bsdextrautils. That gets rid of the breakage in the place where it
> > originated, and doesn't leave things without a transition path.
>
> I beg to
> I think it's probably best at this point to have bsdmainutils depend
> on
> bsdextrautils. That gets rid of the breakage in the place where it
> originated, and doesn't leave things without a transition path.
I beg to disagree, there is a transition plan, namely depending on the
right package.
> I don't know what Julien had in mind, presumably worried about other
> breakage to surface. Note that obvious fix to man-db will all
> debhelper
> using packages transitively build-depending on bsdextrautils.
Instead of bsdmainutils, yes.
Michael
--
Michael Meskes
Michael at Fam-Meskes dot
On Mon, Jun 22, 2020 at 13:37:56 -0300, David Bremner wrote:
> Michael Meskes writes:
>
> > On Mon, 2020-06-22 at 11:37 -0300, David Bremner wrote:
> >> Michael Meskes writes:
> >>
> >> > > IMO the move of col needs to be rolled back ASAP. And, if it is
> >> > > to
> >> >
> >> > Why? Care
Michael Meskes writes:
> On Mon, 2020-06-22 at 11:37 -0300, David Bremner wrote:
>> Michael Meskes writes:
>>
>> > > IMO the move of col needs to be rolled back ASAP. And, if it is
>> > > to
>> >
>> > Why? Care to give a reason?
>> >
>>
>> The change broke man-db, as I explained in a
On Mon, 2020-06-22 at 11:37 -0300, David Bremner wrote:
> Michael Meskes writes:
>
> > > IMO the move of col needs to be rolled back ASAP. And, if it is
> > > to
> >
> > Why? Care to give a reason?
> >
>
> The change broke man-db, as I explained in a previous message.
Oh, that I understand
Michael Meskes writes:
>> IMO the move of col needs to be rolled back ASAP. And, if it is to
>
> Why? Care to give a reason?
>
The change broke man-db, as I explained in a previous message.
d
> IMO the move of col needs to be rolled back ASAP. And, if it is to
Why? Care to give a reason?
Michael
--
Michael Meskes
Michael at Fam-Meskes dot De, Michael at Meskes dot (De|Com|Net|Org)
Meskes at (Debian|Postgresql) dot Org
Jabber: michael at xmpp dot meskes dot org
VfL Borussia! Força
On Mon, Jun 22, 2020 at 03:42:33PM +0200, Michael Meskes wrote:
> > 'm adding the maintainers of util-linux (bsdextrautils) and
> > bsdmainutils
> > to Cc. Which path forward do you see for this issue? A similar issue
> > seems to affect many packages, such as:
> > ...
>
> It seems to me there
* Michael Meskes [200622 15:42]:
> > 'm adding the maintainers of util-linux (bsdextrautils) and
> > bsdmainutils
> > to Cc. Which path forward do you see for this issue? A similar issue
> > seems to affect many packages, such as:
> > ...
>
> It seems to me there are two options here, either we
> 'm adding the maintainers of util-linux (bsdextrautils) and
> bsdmainutils
> to Cc. Which path forward do you see for this issue? A similar issue
> seems to affect many packages, such as:
> ...
It seems to me there are two options here, either we ask all those
packages to change the dependency
Lucas Nussbaum writes:
>
> Hi David,
>
> 'col' indeed moved to bsdextrautils. But in the notmuch case, there's
> nothing pulling bsdextrautils during the build, so it's not installed.
>
> I suspect that when you dist-upgraded your chroot, you somehow ended up
> with a non-minimal chroot that
On 22/06/20 at 09:32 +0200, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> On 21/06/20 at 20:50 -0300, David Bremner wrote:
> > Lucas Nussbaum writes:
> >
> > > Source: notmuch
> > > Version: 0.29.3-1
> > > Severity: serious
> > > Justification: FTBFS on amd64
> > > Tags: bullseye sid ftbfs
> > > Usertags:
On 21/06/20 at 20:50 -0300, David Bremner wrote:
> Lucas Nussbaum writes:
>
> > Source: notmuch
> > Version: 0.29.3-1
> > Severity: serious
> > Justification: FTBFS on amd64
> > Tags: bullseye sid ftbfs
> > Usertags: ftbfs-20200620 ftbfs-bullseye
> >
> >>
> >> T010-help-test: Testing online
Source: notmuch
Version: 0.29.3-1
Severity: serious
Justification: FTBFS on amd64
Tags: bullseye sid ftbfs
Usertags: ftbfs-20200620 ftbfs-bullseye
Hi,
During a rebuild of all packages in sid, your package failed to build
on amd64.
Relevant part (hopefully):
> make[2]: Entering directory
26 matches
Mail list logo
