Bug#607873: FTBFS: dpkg-gencontrol: error: error occurred while parsing Suggests field
On Mon, Dec 27, 2010 at 12:25:56PM +0100, Rene Engelhard wrote: On Thu, Dec 23, 2010 at 01:42:31PM +0100, Lionel Elie Mamane wrote: Source: openoffice.org Severity: serious Justification: Policy 7.7 The policy doesn't say anything about broken, misconfigured systems. I don't see how my system is broken and/or misconfigured. At the end of the email, you seem to imply that the broken, misconfigured part is that I'm mixing stable and testing/unstable. My understanding is that this has always been supported / allowed (and more generally, mixing/upgrading from release N and/to release N+1, of which testing is an alpha / beta version), albeit not very well tested. What is not supported is mixing/upgrading oldstable with/to testing/unstable, nor release N and/to release N+2. Neither does it say anything about filing it against sids version when history also is affected. (since 1:3.0.1-3) One reports bugs with the information one has. I determined that the sid version was affected, and had no information on whether older versions were, and which ones. Version: 1:3.2.1-10 So this is wrong, and you bogusly blocked a important bugfix from entering testing. No, this is not wrong. It states that this bug is present in version 1:3.2.1-10, and it is. It does not state anything about past versions, it does not say past versions don't have this bug, and it does not state that past versions have this bug. APT prefers testing APT policy: (600, 'testing'), (600, 'stable'), (500, 'stable'), (300, 'unstable'), (1, 'experimental') ... and the above works unless someone has such a broken mix (what has stable to do here?!) which results in two different libdb-devs pointing to different lidbX.Ys on his system... No, they are not on the system, but available for installation. One could even have a non-Debian repository in /etc/apt/sources.list, that offers yet another libdb-dev, with a higher (or lower) pin and/or version number. Then one would also have two different libdb-dev available for installation. -- Lionel -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#607873: FTBFS: dpkg-gencontrol: error: error occurred while parsing Suggests field
Hi, On Sat, Jan 01, 2011 at 10:06:36PM +0100, Lionel Elie Mamane wrote: I don't see how my system is broken and/or misconfigured. At the end of the email, you seem to imply that the broken, misconfigured part is that I'm mixing stable and testing/unstable. My understanding is No, I am implying that a testing system + stable in s.l is broken, that this has always been supported / allowed (and more generally, mixing/upgrading from release N and/to release N+1, of which testing is an alpha / beta version), albeit not very well tested. What is stable + testing is as you say OK (but then you are on your own anyways) No, this is not wrong. It states that this bug is present in version 1:3.2.1-10, and it is. It does not state anything about past versions, it does not say past versions don't have this bug, and it does not state that past versions have this bug. True, nevertheless you blocked other fixes with that. (And if you used testing why didn't you dfile it against testings version?) APT prefers testing APT policy: (600, 'testing'), (600, 'stable'), (500, 'stable'), (300, 'unstable'), (1, 'experimental') ... and the above works unless someone has such a broken mix (what has stable to do here?!) which results in two different libdb-devs pointing to different lidbX.Ys on his system... No, they are not on the system, but available for installation. One They are on the system in the sense of apts cache. could even have a non-Debian repository in /etc/apt/sources.list, that offers yet another libdb-dev, with a higher (or lower) pin and/or That would be even more broken, imho. For important libs like libdb that is... And will cause people to build against the wrong one.. Anyway, bug already fixed... Grüße/Regards, René -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#607873: FTBFS: dpkg-gencontrol: error: error occurred while parsing Suggests field
found 607873 1:3.0.1-3
retitle 607873 FTBFS: dpkg-gencontrol: error: error occurred while parsing
Suggests field when more, different libdb-dev existing.
thanks
On Thu, Dec 23, 2010 at 01:42:31PM +0100, Lionel Elie Mamane wrote:
Source: openoffice.org
Severity: serious
Justification: Policy 7.7
The policy doesn't say anything about broken, misconfigured systems. Neither
does it say anything about filing it against sids version when history also
is affected. (since 1:3.0.1-3)
Version: 1:3.2.1-10
So this is wrong, and you bogusly blocked a important bugfix from entering
testing.
Package `libavalon-framework-java' is not installed.
Use dpkg --info (= dpkg-deb --info) to examine archive files,
and dpkg --contents (= dpkg-deb --contents) to list their contents.
Package `libavalon-framework-java' is not installed.
Use dpkg --info (= dpkg-deb --info) to examine archive files,
and dpkg --contents (= dpkg-deb --contents) to list their contents.
Not relevant here.
dpkg-gencontrol: warning: can't parse dependency libdb4.6-dbg libdb4.8-dbg
This is the problem.
What OOo does is the following:
BUILD_DEPS += , libdb-dev
DBG_DBG_SUGGESTS += , $(shell apt-cache show libdb-dev | grep Depends |
awk '{ print $$2 }' | sed -e s/dev/dbg/)
to find out what db it builds against to add the correct suggests. No,
hardcoding it is no way, and there's no libdb-dbg.
APT prefers testing
APT policy: (600, 'testing'), (600, 'stable'), (500, 'stable'), (300,
'unstable'), (1, 'experimental')
... and the above works unless someone has such a broken mix (what has stable
to do here?!) which results in two different libdb-devs pointing to different
lidbX.Ys on his system...
In any case, I am not going to change this.
Grüße/Regards,
René
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#607873: FTBFS: dpkg-gencontrol: error: error occurred while parsing Suggests field
tag 607873 + pending thanks On Mon, Dec 27, 2010 at 12:25:56PM +0100, Rene Engelhard wrote: ... and the above works unless someone has such a broken mix (what has stable to do here?!) which results in two different libdb-devs pointing to different lidbX.Ys on his system... In any case, I am not going to change this. A quick discussion on #debian-release gives that the RT does think this is serious despite the broken APT config (*sigh*), so I probably should replace the apt-cache show with dpkg -s... Grüße/Regards, René -- .''`. René Engelhard -- Debian GNU/Linux Developer : :' : http://www.debian.org | http://people.debian.org/~rene/ `. `' r...@debian.org | GnuPG-Key ID: D03E3E70 `- Fingerprint: E12D EA46 7506 70CF A960 801D 0AA0 4571 D03E 3E70 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
