Your message dated Mon, 17 Jul 2023 08:20:09 +0200
with message-id <[email protected]>
and subject line Re: Bug#1040001: Role of tibble? (Was: Bug#1040001: Seeking
advise how to proceed with the transition / move R stack to testing)
has caused the Debian Bug report #1040001,
regarding transition: r-base
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.
(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact [email protected]
immediately.)
--
1040001: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1040001
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact [email protected] with problems
--- Begin Message ---
Package: release.debian.org
Severity: normal
User: [email protected]
Usertags: transition
X-Debbugs-Cc: [email protected], [email protected]
Control: affects -1 + src:r-base
Hi,
I'm not sure that we are in the right status to ask for a transition bug
since the affected package was just uploaded some time ago by its
maintainer who did not considered a proper transition. This was discussed
on [email protected] in several postings - I try to point you to
the most relevant ones
https://lists.debian.org/debian-r/2023/06/msg00011.html
as a response to >30 bugs against single packages all affecting
the r-base migration due to (to be expected) autopkgtest errors
in testing. You can basically get this list of now all RC buggy
packages from the tracker page or r-base[1]
https://lists.debian.org/debian-r/2023/06/msg00017.html
suggests r-graphics-api-* after r-base maintainer confirmed
"they cheated _a little_ and changes the graphics API" (probably
meaning ABI not API)
https://lists.debian.org/debian-r/2023/06/msg00016.html
Reference to the docs
https://lists.debian.org/debian-r/2023/06/msg00025.html
In the end of this mail three options are listed which I simply
repeat here for your comfort:
1. implement the r-graphics-api-*
This might be a bit complex since for the moment I do not know
any means how to detect the packages that need this dependency
(and how we can implement this into dh-update-R) So this might
become technically complex in the first case
2. Just do a full r-api transition
This would work but affects more packages than strictly
necessary. My gut feeling says we will be able to finish this
earlier than 1. despite technically not perfect
3. Blindly ignore the fact that we need a transition and follow
the hackish workaround by using random versioned Depends as
suggested by Nilesh for r-cran-epi.
https://lists.debian.org/debian-r/2023/06/msg00027.html
Confirmation for option 1.
While I would love to hear the opinion of the release team what kind of
transition (1. or 2.) should be prefered (if this is possible now at all
since the affected package r-base 4.3.1 is in the archive since some
time and also the most urgent packages are rebuild manually) or whether
we need to fight manually through this mess (option 3.) I confirm that
I agree with Johannes Ranke to prefer option 1. and do it "right" to be
safe for the next time.
To support this idea I just commited some proof of concept change to
dh-r which would support injecting a virtual package in case r-base
would define it. This requires confirmation of the r-base maintainer.
Sorry that this transition bug is that complex. I would have loved if
it would went more coordinated but unfortunately that's not in my hands
and I simply try to reassemble the pieces.
Kind regards
Andreas.
[1] https://tracker.debian.org/pkg/r-base
[2]
https://salsa.debian.org/r-pkg-team/dh-r/-/commit/f79e2573a59c1ff01c526a7dcf15b7f85263cc29
Ben file:
title = "r-base";
is_affected = <Fill out>;
is_good = <Fill out>;
is_bad = <Fill out>;
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Hi,
On 13-07-2023 21:29, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote:
Almost done building, will upload shortly.
And with a tiny bit of help, it migrated yesterday. Hence closing this bug.
Paul
OpenPGP_signature
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
--- End Message ---
