Bug#695272: libphone-utils0: harmful postrm purge action in M-A:same package
On Mon, Dec 10, 2012 at 23:37:54 +0100, Dominik George wrote: Is there a particular use case for such support, other than because we can? If not, then not having multi-arch support in wheezy doesn't seem a huge issue; ymmv, obviously. ACK. I can prepare another version for wheezy incorporating this. What about version numbering and such, now -2 has been uploaded? Upload a -3 version with the not-for-wheezy changes reverted. Cheers, Julien signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Bug#695272: libphone-utils0: harmful postrm purge action in M-A:same package
On Fri, 2012-12-07 at 09:11 +0100, Helmut Grohne wrote: Introducing a new binary package is a quite big change. Please contact the release team on whether such a change is acceptable at this point of the freeze. Apparently no-one did that before uploading. As Helmut said, it's not really appropriate during a freeze, particularly when there's a less invasive alternative for wheezy: Note that simply removing M-A:same is also way to solve this issue and that libphone-utils0 has very few reverse dependencies. Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#695272: libphone-utils0: harmful postrm purge action in M-A:same package
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 Hi, On Fri, 2012-12-07 at 09:11 +0100, Helmut Grohne wrote: Introducing a new binary package is a quite big change. Please contact the release team on whether such a change is acceptable at this point of the freeze. Apparently no-one did that before uploading. As Helmut said, it's not really appropriate during a freeze, particularly when there's a less invasive alternative for wheezy: Apparently, no-one did ;). I didn't find the time to do that, and Sebastian was quick as a fox ;). Note that simply removing M-A:same is also way to solve this issue and that libphone-utils0 has very few reverse dependencies. That would mean having no multi-arch support in the package, wouldn't it? - -nik - -- * mirabilos is handling my post-1990 smartphone * mirabilos Aaah, it vibrates! Wherefor art thou, daemonic device?? PGP fingerprint: 2086 9A4B E67D 1DCD FFF6 F6C1 59FC 8E1D 6F2A 8001 -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v2.0.19 (GNU/Linux) iQFOBAEBCAA4BQJQxl14MRpodHRwczovL3d3dy5kb21pbmlrLWdlb3JnZS5kZS9n cGctcG9saWN5LnR4dC5hc2MACgkQWfyOHW8qgAE0GAf/Tn/I1WHVH3C1dIi1KSwJ VLpwt61PR/PDE+Rwia0PqH3bE1laqbeG1lnn08j1XgMcj5t12QRW2SYSaYw3Wlti xHrNCB8PHfizjP/iKqMiQZsaUvu4QLnAy7R2hP+erFOwP/j+uJrdNHuZgwQac+VF j/w1klOZIvhr4+96ggzDBuvAer5w6IjbepHVVhp4hacA0q2GqD2Z3BEBH6YLEM7r 6lV/P6sySADwGBKg1URC75khmd8s1+avRkDQy+cqqkdO9k8KCBYQnClWMQ1H460H FoEX/iBXDneAX+pDnk0Qeh/dU2YZLB5RYj+xNHspC+LCrnNQq2ls2RTbLD04NW5t yw== =vGL+ -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#695272: libphone-utils0: harmful postrm purge action in M-A:same package
On Mon, 2012-12-10 at 23:09 +0100, Dominik George wrote: On Fri, 2012-12-07 at 09:11 +0100, Helmut Grohne wrote: Note that simply removing M-A:same is also way to solve this issue and that libphone-utils0 has very few reverse dependencies. That would mean having no multi-arch support in the package, wouldn't it? Is there a particular use case for such support, other than because we can? If not, then not having multi-arch support in wheezy doesn't seem a huge issue; ymmv, obviously. Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#695272: libphone-utils0: harmful postrm purge action in M-A:same package
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 Is there a particular use case for such support, other than because we can? If not, then not having multi-arch support in wheezy doesn't seem a huge issue; ymmv, obviously. ACK. I can prepare another version for wheezy incorporating this. What about version numbering and such, now -2 has been uploaded? - -nik -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v2.0.19 (GNU/Linux) iQFOBAEBCAA4BQJQxmQ/MRpodHRwczovL3d3dy5kb21pbmlrLWdlb3JnZS5kZS9n cGctcG9saWN5LnR4dC5hc2MACgkQWfyOHW8qgAHXAgf/W0YB8aBvDzOQxeEZBzmA 3n2e5PYEnM3OUeXFaj0MEN4mhEVap16waxpTbbgcvS832ND00MQpfCwWCPfJXe3f dglgCnjWSvSXgIdRtmTXYyOXGwtjBTgz7XVVnWA/uERADLTpvTDr/eN7oJdA7WGj bhbt9tD664Y00yuA7HhuaIN0a5QltEoDroWrIbJIn403AJFx/laPHBdw3R0DEIKq rWh4uYfBPcQl9WKVNOCkU/4N0F0yPeWpp/0jHQwbpShR/4fuUZK5iHqGd3Ih8Arm Hevl2OGyBDccCahQVgN/9RVxE/l0tPiDcVazNaIai+67qQv7ZiWG+aJs6NCccj81 SQ== =GgxX -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#695272: [pkg-fso-maint] Bug#695272: libphone-utils0: harmful postrm purge action in M-A:same package
Hi, On Mon, Dec 10, 2012 at 11:37:54PM +0100, Dominik George wrote: Is there a particular use case for such support, other than because we can? If not, then not having multi-arch support in wheezy doesn't seem a huge issue; ymmv, obviously. The package is more or less smartphone exclusive, so basically only interesting for ARM. Multi-Arch is helpful for armel vs armhf vs arm64. I don't think this is important for wheezy, though. Even more interesting is support for crosscompilers etc., but the fso/shr related packages do not yet enable M-A for the -dev packages, so obviously it's also irrelevant for wheezy. = IMHO removing M-A is not a huge issue I can prepare another version for wheezy incorporating this. preparing a upload for testing was what I indented to do, too. I planed to check how to fix this without removing M-A support, though. It should be possible to do something like this in the postrm script: if [ !package_is_still_installed_for_another_arch ] ; then remove files fi What about version numbering and such, now -2 has been uploaded? It should be something like -1+wheezy1. This makes the version bigger than the one currently in wheezy, but smaller than the one currently in unstable. -- Sebastian signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Bug#695272: [pkg-fso-maint] Bug#695272: libphone-utils0: harmful postrm purge action in M-A:same package
[Dropping adsb as he is probably not interested in technical details.] On Tue, Dec 11, 2012 at 02:25:54AM +0100, Sebastian Reichel wrote: preparing a upload for testing was what I indented to do, too. I planed to check how to fix this without removing M-A support, though. It should be possible to do something like this in the postrm script: if [ !package_is_still_installed_for_another_arch ] ; then remove files fi You could bluntly copy this from libwrap0. I am not sure whether its solution is the best, but it seems technically correct. Helmut -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#695272: libphone-utils0: harmful postrm purge action in M-A:same package
On Fri, Dec 07, 2012 at 12:41:19AM +0100, Dominik George wrote: I propose that you, Helmut, try to test whether this fixes the problem and report back if it does. Thanks for your work on this issue. Introducing a new binary package is a quite big change. Please contact the release team on whether such a change is acceptable at this point of the freeze. Note that simply removing M-A:same is also way to solve this issue and that libphone-utils0 has very few reverse dependencies. This is not to say that the general approach of splitting the package would be flawed. To the contrary. So I encourage you to target experimental or even unstable with such a fix independently. The new package you are introducing is named libphone-utils0-common. So when there is a soname bump, there will be a libphone-utils1-common package. Those packages then share a configuration file. Transferring that configuration file across packages seems difficult at best. It might be better to drop the soname from the common package. This is not without problems though. I suggest to wait for a maintainer response on this issue. Unrelated to the reported issue, the code updating the configuration file could to better at leaving backup files in case something goes wrong. Helmut -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#695272: libphone-utils0: harmful postrm purge action in M-A:same package
Package: libphone-utils0 Version: 0.1+git20110523-1.2 Severity: serious It is technically possible to install libphone-utils0:amd64 and libphone-utils0:i386 in parallel. If I then purge libphone-utils0:i386, /etc/phone-utils.conf will disappear even though it is still needed by libphone-utils:amd64. This is due to the postrm script not taking multiple installations of the same package into account. Helmut -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
