Bug#339409: acknowledged by developer (Re: Bug#339409: typo in lib64z1-dev dependency)
Debian Bug Tracking System writes: As far as I can tell there is no actual bug here: the lib64c-dev provides exists in unstable and the dependency appears to do what I was expecting it to do. yes, but you are required to depend on a real package as well, not just only on a virtual package. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#339409: acknowledged by developer (Re: Bug#339409: typo in lib64z1-dev dependency)
This one time, at band camp, Matthias Klose said: Debian Bug Tracking System writes: As far as I can tell there is no actual bug here: the lib64c-dev provides exists in unstable and the dependency appears to do what I was expecting it to do. yes, but you are required to depend on a real package as well, not just only on a virtual package. I sort of diagree here. AIUI, the reason for the rule to depend on real || virtual is to have consistent behavior when doing automated packaging work - the autobuilders will install the same package from a given pool of choices and so on. This is to cover things like awk, which is provided by gawk, mawk, etc. This is not that sort of situation - if I read things right, there is only one package on each architecture providing this virtual package - the virtual package is only there to provide an easy way to get that functionality across architectures without hard-coding all of the architectures individually. If there were more than one package per architecture providing this virtual package, then the dependency would need to be adjusted to provide consistent behavior. But at first blush, we don't seem to be there. But I may be missing something. I'm willing ot be convinced, but this seems like one of those corner cases where following policy to the letter is actually less helpful than the current arrangement. -- - | ,''`.Stephen Gran | | : :' :[EMAIL PROTECTED] | | `. `'Debian user, admin, and developer | |`- http://www.debian.org | - signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Bug#339409: acknowledged by developer (Re: Bug#339409: typo in lib64z1-dev dependency)
On Sat, Nov 19, 2005 at 03:20:20PM +, Stephen Gran wrote: If there were more than one package per architecture providing this virtual package, then the dependency would need to be adjusted to provide consistent behavior. But at first blush, we don't seem to be there. Yes, that's pretty much it - the real package is only needed to avoid tools like apt getting upset if they have to make a decision about what to install. If there is only one possible option this doesn't apply (which is why you can use Provides: when renaming a package). -- You grabbed my hand and we fell into it, like a daydream - or a fever. signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Bug#339409: typo in lib64z1-dev dependency
On Wed, Nov 16, 2005 at 04:43:40AM +0100, Matthias Klose wrote: Package: lib64z1-dev Severity: serious Version: 1:1.2.3-6 s/lib64c-dev/lib64c6-dev/ Could you clarify what the problem you're reporting here is, please? As far as I can tell the current packages are installable with just the lib64c-dev dependency: | $ sudo apt-get install lib64z1-dev | Reading package lists... Done | Building dependency tree... Done | The following extra packages will be installed: | libc6-dev-ppc64 | The following NEW packages will be installed: | lib64z1-dev libc6-dev-ppc64 | 0 upgraded, 2 newly installed, 0 to remove and 1 not upgraded. | Need to get 59.4kB/2049kB of archives. | After unpacking 7758kB of additional disk space will be used. | Do you want to continue [Y/n]? and glibc does have the packages provide lib64c-dev (I have 2.3.5-8 here). -- You grabbed my hand and we fell into it, like a daydream - or a fever. signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Bug#339409: typo in lib64z1-dev dependency
On Wed, Nov 16, 2005 at 04:43:40AM +0100, Matthias Klose wrote: s/lib64c-dev/lib64c6-dev/ The version of glibc in unstable seems to disagree with that one (not that it matters too much given your subsequent message). -- You grabbed my hand and we fell into it, like a daydream - or a fever. signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Bug#339409: typo in lib64z1-dev dependency
Package: lib64z1-dev Severity: serious Version: 1:1.2.3-6 s/lib64c-dev/lib64c6-dev/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
