Control: forwarded -1 https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/ubuntu-dev-tools/+bug/2142563
Hello, I'm facing the same issue as well and reported also to ubuntu launchpad since I don't know who really maintains this package. https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/ubuntu-dev-tools/+bug/2142563 This is on Debian testing/unstable. If I run: reverse-depends -b src:rust-tz-rs Then output is Reverse-Build-Depends-Arch ========================== * shotman (for librust-tz-rs-dev) However, a search in https://codesearch.debian.net/search?q=rust-tz-rs&literal=1 Shows that there are more packages that should be listed. Actually there should be 2 at the time of writing this bug report: rust-handsome-logger, shotman. It actually seems that reverse-depends doesn't consider virtual packages (eg. listed in Provides of the corresponding binary package) properly and fails at identifying the rdeps properly. Regards Fab On Wed, 1 Nov 2023 12:34:06 +0100 Andreas Henriksson <[email protected]> wrote: > Package: ubuntu-dev-tools > Version: 0.193 > Severity: normal > File: /usr/bin/reverse-depends > > Dear Maintainer, > > It seems the `reverse-depends` utility will not find reverse depencies > in the following situation: > * Package A has Provides: foobar > * Package B has Depends: foobar > > The provides/depends pattern is used by the Debian rust team when > packaging rust crates. > > Here's a real-word example: > > ``` > > apt-cache show librust-cpal-dev | grep -e alsa-sys -e Source: > Source: rust-cpal > Depends: librust-alsa-sys-0.2+default-dev, librust-failure-0.1+default-dev > (>= 0.1.5-~~), librust-lazy-static-1+default-dev (>= 1.3-~~), > librust-libc-0.2+default-dev, librust-num-traits-0.2+default-dev (>= 0.2.6-~~) > > apt-cache show librust-alsa-sys-dev | grep -e Source -e > > librust-alsa-sys-0.2+default-dev > Source: rust-alsa-sys > Provides: librust-alsa-sys+default-dev (= 0.2.0-2), > librust-alsa-sys-0+default-dev (= 0.2.0-2), librust-alsa-sys-0-dev (= > 0.2.0-2), librust-alsa-sys-0.2+default-dev (= 0.2.0-2), > librust-alsa-sys-0.2-dev (= 0.2.0-2), librust-alsa-sys-0.2.0+default-dev (= > 0.2.0-2), librust-alsa-sys-0.2.0-dev (= 0.2.0-2) > > reverse-depends -r sid librust-alsa-sys-dev > No reverse dependencies found > > reverse-depends -r sid librust-alsa-sys-0.2+default-dev > b'<p>Package not published in specified release</p>' > > apt-cache policy librust-alsa-sys-dev > librust-alsa-sys-dev: > Installed: (none) > Candidate: 0.2.0-2 > Version table: > 0.2.0-2 500 > 500 http://deb.debian.org/debian bookworm/main arm64 Packages > 400 http://deb.debian.org/debian unstable/main arm64 Packages > > reverse-depends -r sid src:rust-alsa-sys > No reverse dependencies found > > reverse-depends -r sid -b src:rust-alsa-sys > No reverse dependencies found > > > ``` > > It would ofcourse be best if reverse-depends could simply handle the > Provides pattern, but maybe it would be easier to implement just warning > when encountering a package which has Provides at all (just to give the > user a chance to react that there might actually be reverse dependencies > that are just not found). > > > PS. I also tested (latest version of) ubuntu-dev-tools 0.197 and > confirmed it behaves the same. > > > > -- System Information: > Debian Release: 12.1 > APT prefers stable-security > APT policy: (500, 'stable-security'), (500, 'stable'), (400, 'unstable'), > (300, 'experimental') > Architecture: arm64 (aarch64)
