Your message dated Sun, 6 Jan 2019 21:10:55 +0100
with message-id <[email protected]>
and subject line Re: Bug#912857: libruby2.5 is wrongly marked Multi-Arch: same
has caused the Debian Bug report #912857,
regarding libruby2.5 is wrongly marked Multi-Arch: same
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.)
--
912857: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=912857
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact [email protected] with problems
--- Begin Message ---
Package: libruby2.5
Version: 2.5.1-6+b1
Severity: important
User: [email protected]
Usertags: rebootstrap
libruby2.5 is wrongly marked Multi-Arch: same. It fails to coinstall on
amd64 and arm64:
| Unpacking libruby2.5:arm64 (2.5.1-6+b1) ...
| dpkg: error processing archive
/tmp/apt-dpkg-install-xsTPRC/29-libruby2.5_2.5.1-6+b1_arm64.deb (--unpack):
| trying to overwrite shared
'/usr/lib/ruby/2.5.0/rdoc/generator/template/darkfish/images/macFFBgHack.png',
which is different from other instances of package libruby2.5:arm64
| dpkg-deb: error: paste subprocess was killed by signal (Broken pipe)
| Errors were encountered while processing:
| /tmp/apt-dpkg-install-xsTPRC/29-libruby2.5_2.5.1-6+b1_arm64.deb
| E: Sub-process /usr/bin/dpkg returned an error code (1)
The multiarch hinter says:
| libruby2.5 conflicts on
/usr/lib/ruby/2.5.0/rdoc/generator/template/darkfish/images/macFFBgHack.png on
any two of amd64, arm64, armel, armhf, and 6 more
Please remove the erroneous Multi-Arch: same marking or fix the file
conflict.
Helmut
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Version: 2.5.3-3
Hi Antonio,
On Thu, Nov 29, 2018 at 05:52:16PM -0200, Antonio Terceiro wrote:
> Control: done -1 2.5.3-3
It seems that you meant to close this bug with the reason below:
> It seems the final form of that file was capturing the build timestamp,
> but that seems to not be the case anymore. I checked this again against
> libruby2.5 2.5.3-3 from the archive and a local binNMU-style build done
> with sbuild, and the files are identical. I also tested installing
> libruby2.5:i386 and libruby2.5:arm64 from the archive on an amd64
> container, and it went fine.
Since the closure didn't happen, I'm doing it now for you. Please reopen
if that's not what you meant.
Helmut
--- End Message ---
_______________________________________________
Pkg-ruby-extras-maintainers mailing list
[email protected]
https://alioth-lists.debian.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-ruby-extras-maintainers
