Bug#871269: missing Replaces
On 9 August 2017 at 19:43, Andreas Beckmann wrote: | On 2017-08-09 19:09, Andreas Beckmann wrote: | > I can't find a *gsl*prof* package in the archive, so this indeed seems | > to be a new one. And should be totally unrelated to the splitting of the | > library package. | | That's an interesting one. Above analysis was without looking at the | source. It's in the source package, but did not get built so far, | except for your last upload. Let me see what happens in my local build ... | | In the i386 build log from the buildd I see: | | dpkg-genchanges: warning: package libgsl-prof in control file but not in files list | | BTW, you should use source-only uploads nowadays (unless you have | something that needs to go through NEW). | | Looking at the source now: | | $ grep -r libgsl-prof debian/ | debian/rules:profpack := libgsl-prof | debian/control:Package: libgsl-prof | $ grep -r profpack debian/ | debian/rules:#profpack := libgsl$(sonum)-prof | debian/rules:profpack := libgsl-prof | debian/rules:debprof := $(CURDIR)/debian/$(profpack) | debian/rules:export DH_OPTIONS =-N$(libpack) -N$(libcblas) -N$(devpack) -N$(binpack) -N$(dbgpack) -p$(profpack) | debian/rules:export DH_OPTIONS =-N$(profpack) | debian/rules: $(MAKE) -f debian/rules DH_OPTIONS="-i -N$(profpack)" binary-common | debian/rules: $(MAKE) -f debian/rules DH_OPTIONS="-a -N$(profpack)" binary-common Yes, I 'parked' the control entry to old/ and commented out the lines in rules. If memory serves, this was once suggested as a patch, and is triggered by DH_BUILDOPT. Which my pbuilder setup does not set so ... | and without even doing '$PAGER debian/rules' I'd recommend: | * switch to dh | gsl is probably a long grown packaging ... according to the | changelog the package origin predates my first potato system | in 1999 :-) :-/ You are talking to an old and long-time maintainer here. I could do with a hackthon to bring some of my packaging standard up to this decade :) | So something changed on your build machine and libgsl-prof | got built this time. | | ... local rebuild of -5 finished: | | dpkg-genchanges: warning: package libgsl-prof in control file but not in files list It should be fine next round. For which I will get back to you to finalize Replaces / Breaks / Conflicts / ... Thanks for looking over my shoulder :) Dirk -- http://dirk.eddelbuettel.com | @eddelbuettel | e...@debian.org
Bug#871269: missing Replaces
On 2017-08-09 19:09, Andreas Beckmann wrote: > I can't find a *gsl*prof* package in the archive, so this indeed seems > to be a new one. And should be totally unrelated to the splitting of the > library package. That's an interesting one. Above analysis was without looking at the source. It's in the source package, but did not get built so far, except for your last upload. Let me see what happens in my local build ... In the i386 build log from the buildd I see: dpkg-genchanges: warning: package libgsl-prof in control file but not in files list BTW, you should use source-only uploads nowadays (unless you have something that needs to go through NEW). Looking at the source now: $ grep -r libgsl-prof debian/ debian/rules:profpack := libgsl-prof debian/control:Package: libgsl-prof $ grep -r profpack debian/ debian/rules:#profpack := libgsl$(sonum)-prof debian/rules:profpack := libgsl-prof debian/rules:debprof := $(CURDIR)/debian/$(profpack) debian/rules:export DH_OPTIONS =-N$(libpack) -N$(libcblas) -N$(devpack) -N$(binpack) -N$(dbgpack) -p$(profpack) debian/rules:export DH_OPTIONS =-N$(profpack) debian/rules: $(MAKE) -f debian/rules DH_OPTIONS="-i -N$(profpack)" binary-common debian/rules: $(MAKE) -f debian/rules DH_OPTIONS="-a -N$(profpack)" binary-common and without even doing '$PAGER debian/rules' I'd recommend: * switch to dh gsl is probably a long grown packaging ... according to the changelog the package origin predates my first potato system in 1999 :-) So something changed on your build machine and libgsl-prof got built this time. ... local rebuild of -5 finished: dpkg-genchanges: warning: package libgsl-prof in control file but not in files list Andreas
Bug#871269: missing Replaces
On 9 August 2017 at 19:09, Andreas Beckmann wrote:
| On 2017-08-09 18:52, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote:
| > Uploaded a -6 with the versioned Replaces but just got a note it is in NEW
| > because of libgsl-prof -- which seems strange. Any idea?
|
| Since the packaging is not in git (or another vcs), I can't review the
| diff ... and NEW is not accessible AFAIK.
Only one line change in debian/control, plus the debian/changelog entry.
| I can't find a *gsl*prof* package in the archive, so this indeed seems
| to be a new one. And should be totally unrelated to the splitting of the
| library package.
Yes. It is a ghost. I think I experimented with that once, and then on
subsequent builds falsely convinced myself it was part of the regular build.
Will adjust debian/{rules,control}.
Dirk
--
http://dirk.eddelbuettel.com | @eddelbuettel | e...@debian.org
Bug#871269: missing Replaces
On 2017-08-09 18:52, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote: > Uploaded a -6 with the versioned Replaces but just got a note it is in NEW > because of libgsl-prof -- which seems strange. Any idea? Since the packaging is not in git (or another vcs), I can't review the diff ... and NEW is not accessible AFAIK. I can't find a *gsl*prof* package in the archive, so this indeed seems to be a new one. And should be totally unrelated to the splitting of the library package. Andreas
Bug#871269: missing Replaces
On 9 August 2017 at 16:55, Andreas Beckmann wrote: | On 2017-08-09 16:49, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote: | > | All the Conflicts can probably be turned into Breaks (which will make apt's life | > | easier for distupgrades involving this transition) and Breaks and Replaces | > | need to match w.r.t. to the versioning (otherwise you might run into | > | weird corner cases). | > | > Can the Breaks be similarly versioned? Let me get a versioned Replaces out, | > and maybe we can review then? | | Breaks can be versioned in the same way as Conflicts or Replaces (or | nearly anything else). Ok. Uploaded a -6 with the versioned Replaces but just got a note it is in NEW because of libgsl-prof -- which seems strange. Any idea? Dirk -- http://dirk.eddelbuettel.com | @eddelbuettel | e...@debian.org
Bug#871269: missing Replaces
On 2017-08-09 16:49, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote: > | All the Conflicts can probably be turned into Breaks (which will make apt's > life > | easier for distupgrades involving this transition) and Breaks and Replaces > | need to match w.r.t. to the versioning (otherwise you might run into > | weird corner cases). > > Can the Breaks be similarly versioned? Let me get a versioned Replaces out, > and maybe we can review then? Breaks can be versioned in the same way as Conflicts or Replaces (or nearly anything else). Andreas
Bug#871269: missing Replaces
Hi Andreas, Thanks for the note. On 9 August 2017 at 15:58, Andreas Beckmann wrote: | Followup-For: Bug #871269 | | Hi Dirk, | | for libgslcblas0 the Replaces on libgsl23 needs to be versioned (<< 2.4+dfsg-4). Oh, right. | All the Conflicts can probably be turned into Breaks (which will make apt's life | easier for distupgrades involving this transition) and Breaks and Replaces | need to match w.r.t. to the versioning (otherwise you might run into | weird corner cases). Can the Breaks be similarly versioned? Let me get a versioned Replaces out, and maybe we can review then? Thanks so much, Dirk -- http://dirk.eddelbuettel.com | @eddelbuettel | e...@debian.org
Bug#871269: missing Replaces
Followup-For: Bug #871269 Hi Dirk, for libgslcblas0 the Replaces on libgsl23 needs to be versioned (<< 2.4+dfsg-4). All the Conflicts can probably be turned into Breaks (which will make apt's life easier for distupgrades involving this transition) and Breaks and Replaces need to match w.r.t. to the versioning (otherwise you might run into weird corner cases). Andreas
Bug#871269: missing Replaces
(Crap. This sat unsent in Emacs. Anyway -- fixed now, and thanks!) On 7 August 2017 at 10:11, Matthias Klose wrote: | Package: src:gsl | Version: 2.4+dfsg-4 | Severity: serious | Tags: sid buster | | Unpacking libgslcblas0:amd64 (2.4+dfsg-4) ... | dpkg: error processing archive | /tmp/apt-dpkg-install-3HhEhL/10-libgslcblas0_2.4+dfsg-4_amd64.deb (--unpack): | trying to overwrite '/usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libgslcblas.so.0.0.0', which is | also in package libgsl23:amd64 2.4+dfsg-3 | dpkg-deb: error: subprocess paste was killed by signal (Broken pipe) | Preparing to unpack .../11-libgsl-dev_2.4+dfsg-4_amd64.deb ... I am very certain I tested this in Docker before uploading, from both current unstable and testing. Darn. Will fix. Dirk -- http://dirk.eddelbuettel.com | @eddelbuettel | e...@debian.org
Bug#871269: missing Replaces
Package: src:gsl Version: 2.4+dfsg-4 Severity: serious Tags: sid buster Unpacking libgslcblas0:amd64 (2.4+dfsg-4) ... dpkg: error processing archive /tmp/apt-dpkg-install-3HhEhL/10-libgslcblas0_2.4+dfsg-4_amd64.deb (--unpack): trying to overwrite '/usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libgslcblas.so.0.0.0', which is also in package libgsl23:amd64 2.4+dfsg-3 dpkg-deb: error: subprocess paste was killed by signal (Broken pipe) Preparing to unpack .../11-libgsl-dev_2.4+dfsg-4_amd64.deb ...
