Bug#680613: libav: Multi-Arch: foreign libraries
To recap, what's the problem now? Reinhard, I think I got it: Imagine you have an amd64 system and have libavformat53:amd64 installed. Now you want to install program:i386, which depends on libavformat-extra-53 | libavformat53. Because the former is Arch:all and Multi-arch: foreign it is satisfying this dependency for every architecture and it only pulls in libavformat53, which in turn is already installed in the native architecture, i.e. libavformat53:amd64. Thus, libavformat53:i386 is never installed and program:i386 fails to start. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#680613: libav: Multi-Arch: foreign libraries
Source: libav Version: 0.8.3-4 Severity: important User: multiarch-de...@lists.alioth.debian.org Usertags: multiarch libavutil-extra-51, libavdevice-extra-53, libavfilter-extra-2, libpostproc-extra-52, libavformat-extra-53 and libswscale-extra-2 are Multi-Arch: foreign transitional packages. This allows the packages to satisfy dependencies of foreign-architecture packages while providing only libraries for a native architecture, which is obviously incorrect. Transitional library packages should be Multi-Arch: same (but that would require making them Architecture: any). I guess these packages should just be removed, as the only non-transitional versions of the packages still existing in Debian are uninstallable 4:0.7.2.1~bpo60+1 packages in backports and obsolete 4:0.7.2.1+b1 armhf on debports. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#680613: libav: Multi-Arch: foreign libraries
On Sat, Jul 7, 2012 at 11:50 AM, Stepan Golosunov ste...@golosunov.pp.ru wrote: Source: libav Version: 0.8.3-4 Severity: important User: multiarch-de...@lists.alioth.debian.org Usertags: multiarch libavutil-extra-51, libavdevice-extra-53, libavfilter-extra-2, libpostproc-extra-52, libavformat-extra-53 and libswscale-extra-2 are Multi-Arch: foreign transitional packages. This allows the packages to satisfy dependencies of foreign-architecture packages while providing only libraries for a native architecture, which is obviously incorrect. Transitional library packages should be Multi-Arch: same (but that would require making them Architecture: any). I guess these packages should just be removed, as the only non-transitional versions of the packages still existing in Debian are uninstallable 4:0.7.2.1~bpo60+1 packages in backports and obsolete 4:0.7.2.1+b1 armhf on debports. Well, AFAIUI this is a good reason to defer this for after wheezy release. Is there anything we can do about this issue for wheezy? -- regards, Reinhard -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#680613: libav: Multi-Arch: foreign libraries
07.07.2012 ц≈ 11:57:47 +0200 Reinhard Tartler ц▌ц│ц░ц┴ц⌠ц│ц▄: On Sat, Jul 7, 2012 at 11:50 AM, Stepan Golosunov ste...@golosunov.pp.ru wrote: libavutil-extra-51, libavdevice-extra-53, libavfilter-extra-2, libpostproc-extra-52, libavformat-extra-53 and libswscale-extra-2 are Multi-Arch: foreign transitional packages. This allows the packages to satisfy dependencies of foreign-architecture packages while providing only libraries for a native architecture, which is obviously incorrect. Transitional library packages should be Multi-Arch: same (but that would require making them Architecture: any). I guess these packages should just be removed, as the only non-transitional versions of the packages still existing in Debian are uninstallable 4:0.7.2.1~bpo60+1 packages in backports and obsolete 4:0.7.2.1+b1 armhf on debports. Well, AFAIUI this is a good reason to defer this for after wheezy release. Is there anything we can do about this issue for wheezy? What's this? Existence of the packages in backports? They became uninstallable when libav 0.8 was uploaded to backports months ago. (In any case, libav-extra source package probably needs be removed from backports.) If the transitional packages are to stay, the correct way to proceed is either to change them to Multi-Arch: same, Architecture: any or to remove their Multi-Arch headers. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#680613: libav: Multi-Arch: foreign libraries
On Sat, Jul 7, 2012 at 1:03 PM, Stepan Golosunov ste...@golosunov.pp.ru wrote: 07.07.2012 в 11:57:47 +0200 Reinhard Tartler написал: On Sat, Jul 7, 2012 at 11:50 AM, Stepan Golosunov ste...@golosunov.pp.ru wrote: libavutil-extra-51, libavdevice-extra-53, libavfilter-extra-2, libpostproc-extra-52, libavformat-extra-53 and libswscale-extra-2 are Multi-Arch: foreign transitional packages. This allows the packages to satisfy dependencies of foreign-architecture packages while providing only libraries for a native architecture, which is obviously incorrect. Transitional library packages should be Multi-Arch: same (but that would require making them Architecture: any). I guess these packages should just be removed, as the only non-transitional versions of the packages still existing in Debian are uninstallable 4:0.7.2.1~bpo60+1 packages in backports and obsolete 4:0.7.2.1+b1 armhf on debports. Well, AFAIUI this is a good reason to defer this for after wheezy release. Is there anything we can do about this issue for wheezy? What's this? Existence of the packages in backports? They became uninstallable when libav 0.8 was uploaded to backports months ago. (In any case, libav-extra source package probably needs be removed from backports.) Yes, AFAIUI such removals happen on a regular basis without needing to file a bug. BTW, libavformat-extra-53 from bpo is perfectly installable for me. Can you elaborate why they are not for you? If the transitional packages are to stay, the correct way to proceed is either to change them to Multi-Arch: same, Architecture: any or to remove their Multi-Arch headers. Err, they (i.e., all but libavcodec-extra-53, and that's critical) are already Arch: all, with Multi-arch: foreign. Do I understand you correctly that they should rather by Multi-arch: same? -- regards, Reinhard -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#680613: libav: Multi-Arch: foreign libraries
07.07.2012 ц≈ 18:30:49 +0200 Reinhard Tartler ц▌ц│ц░ц┴ц⌠ц│ц▄: On Sat, Jul 7, 2012 at 1:03 PM, Stepan Golosunov ste...@golosunov.pp.ru wrote: 07.07.2012 ц≈ 11:57:47 +0200 Reinhard Tartler ц▌ц│ц░ц┴ц⌠ц│ц▄: On Sat, Jul 7, 2012 at 11:50 AM, Stepan Golosunov ste...@golosunov.pp.ru wrote: libavutil-extra-51, libavdevice-extra-53, libavfilter-extra-2, libpostproc-extra-52, libavformat-extra-53 and libswscale-extra-2 are Multi-Arch: foreign transitional packages. This allows the packages to satisfy dependencies of foreign-architecture packages while providing only libraries for a native architecture, which is obviously incorrect. Transitional library packages should be Multi-Arch: same (but that would require making them Architecture: any). I guess these packages should just be removed, as the only non-transitional versions of the packages still existing in Debian are uninstallable 4:0.7.2.1~bpo60+1 packages in backports and obsolete 4:0.7.2.1+b1 armhf on debports. Well, AFAIUI this is a good reason to defer this for after wheezy release. Is there anything we can do about this issue for wheezy? What's this? Existence of the packages in backports? They became uninstallable when libav 0.8 was uploaded to backports months ago. (In any case, libav-extra source package probably needs be removed from backports.) Yes, AFAIUI such removals happen on a regular basis without needing to file a bug. But libav-extra still hasn't been removed despite being uninstallable for months. BTW, libavformat-extra-53 from bpo is perfectly installable for me. Can you elaborate why they are not for you? http://packages.debian.org/search?keywords=libavformat-extra-53 There are two versions of libavformat-extra-53 in backports. One from libav-extra and one from libav. The first one is uninstallable as there is only one version of libavcodec-extra-53. The second one is a transitional package. (The obsolete libavformat-extra-53 probably still exists because the transitional one is Architecture: all.) % zgrep -A10 'Package: libavformat-extra-53' Packages.gz Package: libavformat-extra-53 Priority: optional Section: libs Installed-Size: 2108 Maintainer: Debian multimedia packages maintainers pkg-multimedia-maintain...@lists.alioth.debian.org Architecture: i386 Source: libav-extra Version: 4:0.7.2.1~bpo60+1 Replaces: libavformat53 Depends: libavcodec-extra-53 (= 4:0.7.2.1~bpo60+1), libavcodec-extra-53 ( 4:0.7.2.1~bpo60+1-99), libavutil-extra-51 (= 4:0.7.2.1~bpo60+1), libavutil-extra-51 ( 4:0.7.2.1~bpo60+1-99), libbz2-1.0, libc6 (= 2.7), librtmp0 (= 2.3), zlib1g (= 1:1.1.4) Conflicts: libavformat53 -- Package: libavformat-extra-53 Priority: optional Section: libs Installed-Size: 68 Maintainer: Debian Multimedia Maintainers pkg-multimedia-maintain...@lists.alioth.debian.org Architecture: all Source: libav Version: 6:0.8.3-1~bpo60+1 Depends: libavformat53 Filename: pool/main/liba/libav/libavformat-extra-53_0.8.3-1~bpo60+1_all.deb Size: 40658 If the transitional packages are to stay, the correct way to proceed is either to change them to Multi-Arch: same, Architecture: any or to remove their Multi-Arch headers. Err, they (i.e., all but libavcodec-extra-53, and that's critical) are already Arch: all, with Multi-arch: foreign. Do I understand you correctly that they should rather by Multi-arch: same? Yes. Now in testing apt-get allows installing, for example, minidlna:amd64 on a system with i386 dpkg without installing libavformat53:amd64, as the Depends: libavformat53 (= 4:0.8-1~) | libavformat-extra-53 (= 4:0.8-1~) is satisfiable by libavformat-extra-53:all and libavformat53:i386 combination. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#680613: libav: Multi-Arch: foreign libraries
On Sat, Jul 7, 2012 at 7:30 PM, Stepan Golosunov ste...@golosunov.pp.ru wrote: 07.07.2012 в 18:30:49 +0200 Reinhard Tartler написал: On Sat, Jul 7, 2012 at 1:03 PM, Stepan Golosunov ste...@golosunov.pp.ru wrote: 07.07.2012 в 11:57:47 +0200 Reinhard Tartler написал: On Sat, Jul 7, 2012 at 11:50 AM, Stepan Golosunov ste...@golosunov.pp.ru wrote: libavutil-extra-51, libavdevice-extra-53, libavfilter-extra-2, libpostproc-extra-52, libavformat-extra-53 and libswscale-extra-2 are Multi-Arch: foreign transitional packages. This allows the packages to satisfy dependencies of foreign-architecture packages while providing only libraries for a native architecture, which is obviously incorrect. Transitional library packages should be Multi-Arch: same (but that would require making them Architecture: any). I guess these packages should just be removed, as the only non-transitional versions of the packages still existing in Debian are uninstallable 4:0.7.2.1~bpo60+1 packages in backports and obsolete 4:0.7.2.1+b1 armhf on debports. Well, AFAIUI this is a good reason to defer this for after wheezy release. Is there anything we can do about this issue for wheezy? What's this? Existence of the packages in backports? They became uninstallable when libav 0.8 was uploaded to backports months ago. (In any case, libav-extra source package probably needs be removed from backports.) Yes, AFAIUI such removals happen on a regular basis without needing to file a bug. But libav-extra still hasn't been removed despite being uninstallable for months. I've cc'ed the backports team. Dear backport maintainers, can you have a look what's going on here? BTW, libavformat-extra-53 from bpo is perfectly installable for me. Can you elaborate why they are not for you? http://packages.debian.org/search?keywords=libavformat-extra-53 There are two versions of libavformat-extra-53 in backports. One from libav-extra and one from libav. The first one is uninstallable as there is only one version of libavcodec-extra-53. The second one is a transitional package. (The obsolete libavformat-extra-53 probably still exists because the transitional one is Architecture: all.) err, the first one is superseeded by the one built from the source package 'libav'. It is uninstallable because the newer packages has a higher version number. Can you please explain the problem again? % zgrep -A10 'Package: libavformat-extra-53' Packages.gz Package: libavformat-extra-53 Priority: optional Section: libs Installed-Size: 2108 Maintainer: Debian multimedia packages maintainers pkg-multimedia-maintain...@lists.alioth.debian.org Architecture: i386 Source: libav-extra Version: 4:0.7.2.1~bpo60+1 Replaces: libavformat53 Depends: libavcodec-extra-53 (= 4:0.7.2.1~bpo60+1), libavcodec-extra-53 ( 4:0.7.2.1~bpo60+1-99), libavutil-extra-51 (= 4:0.7.2.1~bpo60+1), libavutil-extra-51 ( 4:0.7.2.1~bpo60+1-99), libbz2-1.0, libc6 (= 2.7), librtmp0 (= 2.3), zlib1g (= 1:1.1.4) Conflicts: libavformat53 That's the superseeded one and should get removed. -- Package: libavformat-extra-53 Priority: optional Section: libs Installed-Size: 68 Maintainer: Debian Multimedia Maintainers pkg-multimedia-maintain...@lists.alioth.debian.org Architecture: all Source: libav Version: 6:0.8.3-1~bpo60+1 Depends: libavformat53 Filename: pool/main/liba/libav/libavformat-extra-53_0.8.3-1~bpo60+1_all.deb Size: 40658 I cannot testify an installation problem with this package. If the transitional packages are to stay, the correct way to proceed is either to change them to Multi-Arch: same, Architecture: any or to remove their Multi-Arch headers. Err, they (i.e., all but libavcodec-extra-53, and that's critical) are already Arch: all, with Multi-arch: foreign. Do I understand you correctly that they should rather by Multi-arch: same? Yes. Now in testing apt-get allows installing, for example, minidlna:amd64 on a system with i386 dpkg without installing libavformat53:amd64, as the Depends: libavformat53 (= 4:0.8-1~) | libavformat-extra-53 (= 4:0.8-1~) is satisfiable by libavformat-extra-53:all and libavformat53:i386 combination. To recap, what's the problem now? -- regards, Reinhard -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#680613: libav: Multi-Arch: foreign libraries
07.07.2012 ц≈ 19:54:24 +0200 Reinhard Tartler ц▌ц│ц░ц┴ц⌠ц│ц▄: On Sat, Jul 7, 2012 at 7:30 PM, Stepan Golosunov ste...@golosunov.pp.ru wrote: 07.07.2012 ц≈ 18:30:49 +0200 Reinhard Tartler ц▌ц│ц░ц┴ц⌠ц│ц▄: On Sat, Jul 7, 2012 at 1:03 PM, Stepan Golosunov ste...@golosunov.pp.ru wrote: 07.07.2012 ц≈ 11:57:47 +0200 Reinhard Tartler ц▌ц│ц░ц┴ц⌠ц│ц▄: On Sat, Jul 7, 2012 at 11:50 AM, Stepan Golosunov ste...@golosunov.pp.ru wrote: libavutil-extra-51, libavdevice-extra-53, libavfilter-extra-2, libpostproc-extra-52, libavformat-extra-53 and libswscale-extra-2 are Multi-Arch: foreign transitional packages. This allows the packages to satisfy dependencies of foreign-architecture packages while providing only libraries for a native architecture, which is obviously incorrect. Transitional library packages should be Multi-Arch: same (but that would require making them Architecture: any). I guess these packages should just be removed, as the only non-transitional versions of the packages still existing in Debian are uninstallable 4:0.7.2.1~bpo60+1 packages in backports and obsolete 4:0.7.2.1+b1 armhf on debports. err, the first one is superseeded by the one built from the source package 'libav'. It is uninstallable because the newer packages has a higher version number. Can you please explain the problem again? Package: libavformat-extra-53 Version: 4:0.7.2.1~bpo60+1 That's the superseeded one and should get removed. I only mentioned backports in the context of the remove buggy transitional packages solution. If there are no packages to transition from then there is no need for transitional packages to exist. And the only relevant untransitioned packages which can be found in Debian now are the superseded and uninstallable ones in backports. The installable versions are already transitioned. Meaning that the current packages in squeeze-backports and squeeze do not prevent removal of the buggy transitional packages. (Though the removal would still require checking that there are no versioned reverse dependencies without alternatives and probably preapproval from the release team.) If the transitional packages are to stay, the correct way to proceed is either to change them to Multi-Arch: same, Architecture: any or to remove their Multi-Arch headers. Err, they (i.e., all but libavcodec-extra-53, and that's critical) are already Arch: all, with Multi-arch: foreign. Do I understand you correctly that they should rather by Multi-arch: same? Yes. Now in testing apt-get allows installing, for example, minidlna:amd64 on a system with i386 dpkg without installing libavformat53:amd64, as the Depends: libavformat53 (= 4:0.8-1~) | libavformat-extra-53 (= 4:0.8-1~) is satisfiable by libavformat-extra-53:all and libavformat53:i386 combination. To recap, what's the problem now? The problem is that Multi-Arch: foreign header on transitional packages incorrectly allows installation of packages depending on libavformat53:amd64 without installation of libavformat53:amd64. There are at least three solutions: 1. Fix the header to be Multi-Arch: same. 2. Remove Multi-Arch: header from the transtional packages. 3. Remove buggy transitional packages. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
