Not sure why e2fsprogs is BD-uninstallable on amd64?
Hi, At the moment, according to buildd dashboard for e2fsprogs[1], the package is uninstallable on amd64, kfreebsd-amd64, and kfreebsdi396. [1] https://buildd.debian.org/status/package.php?p=e2fsprogs The reason cited is: e2fsprogs depends on missing: - e2fslibs:amd64 (= 1.43.8-2) However, this doesn't make any sense to me. There are no build dependencies on e2fsprogs: Build-Depends: gettext, texinfo, pkg-config, libfuse-dev [linux-any kfreebsd-any] , libattr1-dev, debhelper (>= 9.0), libblkid-dev, uuid-dev, m4 And there with 1.43.9-1, there are no install-time dependency from e2fsprogs to e2fslibs (any more): Pre-Depends: libblkid1 (>= 2.17.2), libc6 (>= 2.14), libcom-err2 (>= 1.42~WIP-2011-10-05-1), libext2fs2 (= 1.43.9-1), libss2 (>= 1.34-1), libuuid1 (>= 2.16) Previously we had such a dependency: Pre-Depends: e2fslibs (= 1.43.8-2), libblkid1 (>= 2.17.2), libc6 (>= 2.14), libcomerr2 (>= 1.42~WIP-2011-10-05-1), libss2 (>= 1.34-1), libuuid1 (>= 2.16) ... but that was before e2fslibs was renamed to libext2fs2 in 1.43.9-1. And since e2fslibs is built as part of e2fsprogs, I'm not sure why this would be a dependency that would case e2fsprogs to be BD-uninstallable in the first place. Can you explain what might be going on? Many thanks!! - Ted
Re: Not sure why e2fsprogs is BD-uninstallable on amd64?
On 09.02.2018 19:56, Theodore Ts'o wrote: > At the moment, according to buildd dashboard for e2fsprogs[1], the package > is uninstallable on amd64, kfreebsd-amd64, and kfreebsdi396. > > [1] https://buildd.debian.org/status/package.php?p=e2fsprogs > > The reason cited is: > > e2fsprogs depends on missing: > - e2fslibs:amd64 (= 1.43.8-2) > > However, this doesn't make any sense to me. There are no build > dependencies on e2fsprogs: > >Build-Depends: gettext, texinfo, pkg-config, libfuse-dev [linux-any > kfreebsd-any] , libattr1-dev, debhelper (>= 9.0), > libblkid-dev, uuid-dev, m4 > > And there with 1.43.9-1, there are no install-time dependency from > e2fsprogs to e2fslibs (any more): > >Pre-Depends: libblkid1 (>= 2.17.2), libc6 (>= 2.14), libcom-err2 (>= > 1.42~WIP-2011-10-05-1), libext2fs2 (= 1.43.9-1), libss2 (>= 1.34-1), libuuid1 > (>= 2.16) > > Previously we had such a dependency: > >Pre-Depends: e2fslibs (= 1.43.8-2), libblkid1 (>= 2.17.2), libc6 (>= > 2.14), libcomerr2 (>= 1.42~WIP-2011-10-05-1), libss2 (>= 1.34-1), libuuid1 > (>= 2.16) > > ... but that was before e2fslibs was renamed to libext2fs2 in > 1.43.9-1. And since e2fslibs is built as part of e2fsprogs, I'm not > sure why this would be a dependency that would case e2fsprogs to be > BD-uninstallable in the first place. That was a red flag to me. It's still in unstable: > e2fslibs | 1.43.7-1 | unstable | kfreebsd-amd64, > kfreebsd-i386 > e2fslibs | 1.43.8-2 | unstable | amd64, arm64, armel, > armhf, hurd-i386, i386, mips, mips64el, mipsel, powerpc, ppc64el, s390x > e2fslibs | 1.43.9-1 | buildd-unstable| all > e2fslibs | 1.43.9-1 | unstable | all For some reason it's not in the cruft report[1], though. So I think you want to request removal of the arch-specific unstable builds that are still there. Unfortunately that sometimes happens when packages go from arch:any to arch:all. Interestingly enough it also just got uploaded on amd64, so I suppose someone did something behind the scenes and forced it into building. After all there might have been some weird interaction with the package filtering we employ before feeding lists to dose-builddebcheck. Kind regards Philipp Kern [1] https://ftp-master.debian.org/cruft-report-daily.txt
Re: Not sure why e2fsprogs is BD-uninstallable on amd64?
On Fri, Feb 09, 2018 at 11:05:42PM +0100, Philipp Kern wrote: > That was a red flag to me. It's still in unstable: > > > e2fslibs | 1.43.7-1 | unstable | kfreebsd-amd64, > > kfreebsd-i386 > > e2fslibs | 1.43.8-2 | unstable | amd64, arm64, armel, > > armhf, hurd-i386, i386, mips, mips64el, mipsel, powerpc, ppc64el, s390x > > e2fslibs | 1.43.9-1 | buildd-unstable| all > > e2fslibs | 1.43.9-1 | unstable | all > > For some reason it's not in the cruft report[1], though. So I think you > want to request removal of the arch-specific unstable builds that are > still there. Unfortunately that sometimes happens when packages go from > arch:any to arch:all. Thanks! It didn't occur to me this could be a problem, but it's definitely what's going on: https://packages.debian.org/unstable/e2fslibs How do I request removal of these cruft arch-specific packages? File a bug against the ftp.debian.org pseudo package? Thanks again, - Ted
Re: Not sure why e2fsprogs is BD-uninstallable on amd64?
On Fri, Feb 09, 2018 at 11:18:25PM -0500, Theodore Ts'o wrote: > Thanks! It didn't occur to me this could be a problem, but it's > definitely what's going on: > > https://packages.debian.org/unstable/e2fslibs > > How do I request removal of these cruft arch-specific packages? File > a bug against the ftp.debian.org pseudo package? Drop that e2fslibs package completely. Libs don't need transitional packages. Also it is not dependency compatible with the old package. (Multi-Arch: same vs non-Multi-Arch arch-all) Bastian -- You! What PLANET is this! -- McCoy, "The City on the Edge of Forever", stardate 3134.0
