Re: Migration path for 'Multi-Arch:allowed' packages

2012-06-17 Thread Goswin von Brederlow
Ben Hutchings b...@decadent.org.uk writes: On Tue, 2012-06-12 at 17:45 +0200, David Kalnischkies wrote: On Mon, Jun 11, 2012 at 9:40 PM, Michael Gilbert mgilb...@debian.org wrote: In particular, I filed a bug against dpkg requesting that it produce more informative error messages in these

Re: Migration path for 'Multi-Arch:allowed' packages

2012-06-14 Thread Marvin Renich
* Ben Hutchings b...@decadent.org.uk [120613 23:56]: On Wed, 2012-06-13 at 12:47 +0100, Wookey wrote: I added a user-oriented HOWTO to the multiarch doc-collection last month as there seemed to be a shortage of such docs to point to that weren't cryptic specifications, or talking mostly

Re: Migration path for 'Multi-Arch:allowed' packages

2012-06-13 Thread Goswin von Brederlow
Andreas Barth a...@ayous.org writes: * David Kalnischkies (kalnischk...@gmail.com) [120612 18:03]: You need to upgrade to support MultiArch, but you need MultiArch to upgrade… (beside, how would the detection for such a message look like?) We had discussed to export foreign-arch packages

Re: Migration path for 'Multi-Arch:allowed' packages

2012-06-13 Thread Ben Hutchings
On Tue, 2012-06-12 at 17:45 +0200, David Kalnischkies wrote: On Mon, Jun 11, 2012 at 9:40 PM, Michael Gilbert mgilb...@debian.org wrote: In particular, I filed a bug against dpkg requesting that it produce more informative error messages in these cases [0], but I wonder if a part of the

Re: Migration path for 'Multi-Arch:allowed' packages

2012-06-13 Thread Wookey
+++ Ben Hutchings [2012-06-13 12:24 +0100]: On Tue, 2012-06-12 at 17:45 +0200, David Kalnischkies wrote: On Mon, Jun 11, 2012 at 9:40 PM, Michael Gilbert mgilb...@debian.org wrote: In particular, I filed a bug against dpkg requesting that it produce more informative error messages in

Re: Migration path for 'Multi-Arch:allowed' packages

2012-06-13 Thread Ben Hutchings
On Wed, 2012-06-13 at 12:47 +0100, Wookey wrote: +++ Ben Hutchings [2012-06-13 12:24 +0100]: On Tue, 2012-06-12 at 17:45 +0200, David Kalnischkies wrote: On Mon, Jun 11, 2012 at 9:40 PM, Michael Gilbert mgilb...@debian.org wrote: In particular, I filed a bug against dpkg requesting

Re: Migration path for 'Multi-Arch:allowed' packages

2012-06-12 Thread Stephen Kitt
Hi Mike, On Mon, 11 Jun 2012 15:40:59 -0400, Michael Gilbert mgilb...@debian.org wrote: We've been getting a few bug reports from users attempting to install multiarch wine who have yet to manually enable multiarch itself. Obviously that is a failure on their part, and is easily correctable.

Re: Migration path for 'Multi-Arch:allowed' packages

2012-06-12 Thread Michael Gilbert
On Tue, Jun 12, 2012 at 11:45 AM, David Kalnischkies wrote: On Mon, Jun 11, 2012 at 9:40 PM, Michael Gilbert wrote: In particular, I filed a bug against dpkg requesting that it produce more informative error messages in these cases [0], but I wonder if a part of the solution shouldn't be

Re: Migration path for 'Multi-Arch:allowed' packages

2012-06-12 Thread Philipp Kern
Michael, am Tue, Jun 12, 2012 at 12:57:12PM -0400 hast du folgendes geschrieben: A squeeze-proposed-update could help that along, right? no, we don't generally require people to update to the latest stable to upgrade to the next stable version. Also depending on the solution it might also not

Re: Migration path for 'Multi-Arch:allowed' packages

2012-06-12 Thread Andreas Barth
* David Kalnischkies (kalnischk...@gmail.com) [120612 18:03]: You need to upgrade to support MultiArch, but you need MultiArch to upgrade… (beside, how would the detection for such a message look like?) We had discussed to export foreign-arch packages to the arches packages files at debconf.

Migration path for 'Multi-Arch:allowed' packages

2012-06-11 Thread Michael Gilbert
Hi, We've been getting a few bug reports from users attempting to install multiarch wine who have yet to manually enable multiarch itself. Obviously that is a failure on their part, and is easily correctable. However, I wonder if we can't make such migrations a bit more straightforward? In

Re: Migration path for 'Multi-Arch:allowed' packages

2012-06-11 Thread Adam D. Barratt
On Mon, 2012-06-11 at 15:40 -0400, Michael Gilbert wrote: Also, limitations in the existing testing migration tools are making wine not considered for wheezy, since those tools don't check whether dependencies for 'Multi-Arch: allowed' packages are satisfied by packages on other architectures.