Oeps, didn't sent it to the bug as I intended.
----------  Forwarded Message  ----------

Subject: Re: Bug#690537: reportbug: Package list does not specify arch
Date: Friday 01 January 2016, 16:05:06
From: Diederik de Haas <didi.deb...@cknow.org>
To: Sandro Tosi <sandro.t...@gmail.com>

On Friday 01 January 2016 00:59:31 you wrote:
> > I'm adding my info to this bug report as I would have choosen the same
> > title, even though the steps/behavior aren't the same.
> they are actually different situations.

Ok, do you want me to file a separate bug then?

> > Earlier today I have reported bug #805132
> > (https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=805132) with title
> > "glx-alternative-nvidia:amd64 installs update-glx:armhf as dependency".
> > As you can see by the title the arch where a package came from is
> > critical, but especially that info was missing from the Package list
> > section. The relevant part of that bug report (for this bug):
> > 
> > Versions of packages glx-alternative-nvidia depends on:
> > ii  glx-alternative-mesa  0.7.1
> > ii  glx-diversions        0.7.1
> > ii  update-glx            0.7.1
> > 
> > The maintainer of that package was able to confirm this behavior.
> 
> that list is the package dependencies as defined by
> 
> $ dpkg --status glx-alternative-nvidia | grep Depends
> Depends: update-glx (= 0.7.1), glx-diversions (= 0.7.1),
> glx-alternative-mesa
> 
> which are the ones reportbug enlist.

Which signals 2 issues:
1. Why did it install update-glx:armhf and not update-glx:amd64 as the other 
packages are from amd64? I thought this was an issue with update-glx and I 
thus file the bug against that package (and not apt or dpkg).
(armhf is only a foreign architecture on my system to cross compile for armhf)

2. By not showing the arch from which the packages are installed, it missed 
the crucial information for that bug.
The following list would've made it clear instantly:
Versions of packages glx-alternative-nvidia[:amd64] depends on:
ii  glx-alternative-mesa  0.7.1          amd64
ii  glx-diversions               0.7.1          amd64
ii  update-glx                     0.7.1          armhf


Do I need to take further action and/or provide further info? From the current 
bug status with cloned/blocked it seems 'under control' (but not fixed).

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

_______________________________________________
Reportbug-maint mailing list
Reportbug-maint@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/reportbug-maint

Reply via email to