Bug#989799: psmisc: Undeclared file conflict with manpages-de
Hello Hideki, On Fri, Jul 02, 2021 at 10:29:53AM +0900, Hideki Yamane wrote: > On Thu, 1 Jul 2021 21:07:03 +0200 > Helge Kreutzmann wrote: > > It now has. So this bug is closed, if users upgrade to the latestes > > backport version. > > Hmm, however, this bug is not closed automatically. Weird. > > https://tracker.debian.org/news/1243791/accepted-manpages-l10n-4100-1bpo101-source-into-buster-backports-backports-policy-buster-backports/ This is normal, somehow Closes in backported packages don't work. I asked this earlier and was told otherwiese, but it still applies. > We can close it via mail, but should investigate its reason, IMO. I already did that, however, I can do it again, if necessary. Greetings Helge -- Dr. Helge Kreutzmann deb...@helgefjell.de Dipl.-Phys. http://www.helgefjell.de/debian.php 64bit GNU powered gpg signed mail preferred Help keep free software "libre": http://www.ffii.de/ signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Bug#989799: psmisc: Undeclared file conflict with manpages-de
Hi Helge, On Fri, 2 Jul 2021 10:29:53 +0900 Hideki Yamane wrote: > We can close it via mail, but should investigate its reason, IMO. Note it as https://bugs.debian.org/990557 Let's close Bug#989799 via hand. -- Hideki Yamane
Bug#989799: psmisc: Undeclared file conflict with manpages-de
On Thu, 1 Jul 2021 21:07:03 +0200 Helge Kreutzmann wrote: > It now has. So this bug is closed, if users upgrade to the latestes > backport version. Hmm, however, this bug is not closed automatically. Weird. https://tracker.debian.org/news/1243791/accepted-manpages-l10n-4100-1bpo101-source-into-buster-backports-backports-policy-buster-backports/ We can close it via mail, but should investigate its reason, IMO. -- Hideki Yamane
Bug#989799: psmisc: Undeclared file conflict with manpages-de
Hello Hideki, On Wed, Jun 30, 2021 at 01:46:37PM +0900, Hideki Yamane wrote: > Have it reached to buster-backports repo? It now has. So this bug is closed, if users upgrade to the latestes backport version. Greetings Helge -- Dr. Helge Kreutzmann deb...@helgefjell.de Dipl.-Phys. http://www.helgefjell.de/debian.php 64bit GNU powered gpg signed mail preferred Help keep free software "libre": http://www.ffii.de/ signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Bug#989799: psmisc: Undeclared file conflict with manpages-de
Hello Hideki, On Wed, Jun 30, 2021 at 01:46:37PM +0900, Hideki Yamane wrote: > from buster-backports > Message-Id: <20210630134637.d8e6f92027ef11aeb9a09...@iijmio-mail.jp> > In-Reply-To: <20210627060424.GA7522@Debian-50-lenny-64-minimal> > X-Mailer: Sylpheed 3.7.0 (GTK+ 2.24.33; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) > Mime-Version: 1.0 > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > > On Sun, 27 Jun 2021 08:04:24 +0200 Helge Kreutzmann > wrote: > > manpages-l10n (4.10.0-1~bpo10+1) buster-backports; urgency=medium > > > > * Rebuild for buster-backports. > > * Properly conflict with future versions of psmisc and procps so that > > upgrades to bullseye will work without file conflicts. Closes: #989799 > > > > -- Helge Kreutzmann Sun, 20 Jun 2021 10:27:10 +0200 > > > > Also tracker.debian.org does not show (yet), that it has been accepted. > > Have it reached to buster-backports repo? As far as I can see, no. I'll check in depth later. Greetings Helge -- Dr. Helge Kreutzmann deb...@helgefjell.de Dipl.-Phys. http://www.helgefjell.de/debian.php 64bit GNU powered gpg signed mail preferred Help keep free software "libre": http://www.ffii.de/ signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Bug#989799: psmisc: Undeclared file conflict with manpages-de
from buster-backports Message-Id: <20210630134637.d8e6f92027ef11aeb9a09...@iijmio-mail.jp> In-Reply-To: <20210627060424.GA7522@Debian-50-lenny-64-minimal> X-Mailer: Sylpheed 3.7.0 (GTK+ 2.24.33; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Sun, 27 Jun 2021 08:04:24 +0200 Helge Kreutzmann wrote: > manpages-l10n (4.10.0-1~bpo10+1) buster-backports; urgency=medium > > * Rebuild for buster-backports. > * Properly conflict with future versions of psmisc and procps so that > upgrades to bullseye will work without file conflicts. Closes: #989799 > > -- Helge Kreutzmann Sun, 20 Jun 2021 10:27:10 +0200 > > Also tracker.debian.org does not show (yet), that it has been accepted. Have it reached to buster-backports repo? -- Regards, Hideki Yamane henrich @ debian.org/iijmio-mail.jp
Bug#989799: psmisc: Undeclared file conflict with manpages-de from buster-backports
Hello Paul, On Sat, Jun 26, 2021 at 07:10:47PM +0200, Paul Gevers wrote: > On 26-06-2021 18:03, Helge Kreutzmann wrote: > > I fixed it in 4.9.3-4~bpo10. > > > > However, I think the BTS does not pick up Closes lines from backports? > > I think it does, but the changelog doesn't have an appropriate "Closes" > stanza, so the BTS has no way to know: > https://tracker.debian.org/news/1237690/accepted-manpages-l10n-493-4bpo101-source-into-buster-backports-backports-policy-buster-backports/ Ok, now I'm more awake. First, my package as uploaded has a different stanza: manpages-l10n (4.10.0-1~bpo10+1) buster-backports; urgency=medium * Rebuild for buster-backports. * Properly conflict with future versions of psmisc and procps so that upgrades to bullseye will work without file conflicts. Closes: #989799 -- Helge Kreutzmann Sun, 20 Jun 2021 10:27:10 +0200 Also tracker.debian.org does not show (yet), that it has been accepted. I will close it with a mail to cont...@bugs.debian.org in a moment, so that the BTS is fully aware of the situation. Greetings Helge -- Dr. Helge Kreutzmann deb...@helgefjell.de Dipl.-Phys. http://www.helgefjell.de/debian.php 64bit GNU powered gpg signed mail preferred Help keep free software "libre": http://www.ffii.de/ signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Bug#989799: psmisc: Undeclared file conflict with manpages-de from buster-backports
Hello Craig, On Sun, Jun 27, 2021 at 10:42:53AM +1000, Craig Small wrote: > I'm still not sure if procps and psmisc need to be updated to cater for the > later version of manpages-de. I don't belive so. > I think the issue is that some of the conflicting manpages made it back > into that package, so I need to update psmisc/procps? Yes, and I included a forward fix. I tested this, i.e. created a buster chroot with manpages-de, psmisc, procps. Enabled backports for manpages-de and dist-upgraded all packages. Installed the backport for 4.10.0.1. Then switched sources to testing and did another dist-ugprade. Everything worked. No conflicts, all packages at the expected version. Greetings Helge -- Dr. Helge Kreutzmann deb...@helgefjell.de Dipl.-Phys. http://www.helgefjell.de/debian.php 64bit GNU powered gpg signed mail preferred Help keep free software "libre": http://www.ffii.de/ signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Bug#989799: psmisc: Undeclared file conflict with manpages-de from buster-backports
Hi All, I'm still not sure if procps and psmisc need to be updated to cater for the later version of manpages-de. I think the issue is that some of the conflicting manpages made it back into that package, so I need to update psmisc/procps? - Craig On Sun, 27 Jun 2021 at 05:39, Helge Kreutzmann wrote: > Hello Paul, > On Sat, Jun 26, 2021 at 07:10:47PM +0200, Paul Gevers wrote: > > On 26-06-2021 18:03, Helge Kreutzmann wrote: > > > I fixed it in 4.9.3-4~bpo10. > > > > > > However, I think the BTS does not pick up Closes lines from backports? > > > > I think it does, but the changelog doesn't have an appropriate "Closes" > > stanza, so the BTS has no way to know: > > > https://tracker.debian.org/news/1237690/accepted-manpages-l10n-493-4bpo101-source-into-buster-backports-backports-policy-buster-backports/ > > Yes, sorry. I missed this one after running my tests. > > I'll do so manually. > > Greetings > > Helge > > -- > Dr. Helge Kreutzmann deb...@helgefjell.de >Dipl.-Phys. > http://www.helgefjell.de/debian.php > 64bit GNU powered gpg signed mail preferred >Help keep free software "libre": http://www.ffii.de/ >
Bug#989799: psmisc: Undeclared file conflict with manpages-de from buster-backports
Hello Paul, On Sat, Jun 26, 2021 at 07:10:47PM +0200, Paul Gevers wrote: > On 26-06-2021 18:03, Helge Kreutzmann wrote: > > I fixed it in 4.9.3-4~bpo10. > > > > However, I think the BTS does not pick up Closes lines from backports? > > I think it does, but the changelog doesn't have an appropriate "Closes" > stanza, so the BTS has no way to know: > https://tracker.debian.org/news/1237690/accepted-manpages-l10n-493-4bpo101-source-into-buster-backports-backports-policy-buster-backports/ Yes, sorry. I missed this one after running my tests. I'll do so manually. Greetings Helge -- Dr. Helge Kreutzmann deb...@helgefjell.de Dipl.-Phys. http://www.helgefjell.de/debian.php 64bit GNU powered gpg signed mail preferred Help keep free software "libre": http://www.ffii.de/ signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Bug#989799: psmisc: Undeclared file conflict with manpages-de from buster-backports
Hi, On 26-06-2021 18:03, Helge Kreutzmann wrote: > I fixed it in 4.9.3-4~bpo10. > > However, I think the BTS does not pick up Closes lines from backports? I think it does, but the changelog doesn't have an appropriate "Closes" stanza, so the BTS has no way to know: https://tracker.debian.org/news/1237690/accepted-manpages-l10n-493-4bpo101-source-into-buster-backports-backports-policy-buster-backports/ Paul OpenPGP_signature Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Bug#989799: psmisc: Undeclared file conflict with manpages-de from buster-backports
Hello Paul, On Sat, Jun 26, 2021 at 03:08:34PM +0200, Paul Gevers wrote: > On Mon, 14 Jun 2021 12:19:17 +0200 Axel Beckert wrote: > > Hi Craig and Helge, > > > > Craig Small wrote: > > > reassign -1 manpages-de > > > > Might be the right place indeed, but maybe not in the way you'd > > expect. See below. > > Reading this bug report, it seems that the consensus was that > manpages-de should have the bug. However, that never happened. Is this > bug now fixed in manpages-de (and can thus be closed)? I fixed it in 4.9.3-4~bpo10. However, I think the BTS does not pick up Closes lines from backports? Greetings Helge -- Dr. Helge Kreutzmann deb...@helgefjell.de Dipl.-Phys. http://www.helgefjell.de/debian.php 64bit GNU powered gpg signed mail preferred Help keep free software "libre": http://www.ffii.de/ signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Bug#989799: psmisc: Undeclared file conflict with manpages-de from buster-backports
Hi, On Mon, 14 Jun 2021 12:19:17 +0200 Axel Beckert wrote: > Hi Craig and Helge, > > Craig Small wrote: > > reassign -1 manpages-de > > Might be the right place indeed, but maybe not in the way you'd > expect. See below. Reading this bug report, it seems that the consensus was that manpages-de should have the bug. However, that never happened. Is this bug now fixed in manpages-de (and can thus be closed)? Paul OpenPGP_signature Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Bug#989799: psmisc: Undeclared file conflict with manpages-de from buster-backports
Hello all, I locally build the backport for 4.10.0. I created a buster chroot, installed manpages-de, manpages-fr and manpages-pl from backports and did a dist-ugprade to current testing. If I do this without the fix, the upgrade fails (as now expected), however, a "apt-get -f install" seems to fix it. On Mon, Jun 14, 2021 at 12:19:17PM +0200, Axel Beckert wrote: > Craig Small wrote: > > reassign -1 manpages-de > > Might be the right place indeed, but maybe not in the way you'd > expect. See below. > 2) So I wonder if the buster-backports package of manpages-de could >conflict with the psmisc and procps package in bullseye(*)? This >should probably take care that it is upgraded before procps and >psmisc are upgraded and hopefully solves the issue without too many >side-effects. > >(I'm not sure if Breaks/Replaces with ">>" or ">=" really work as >expected. I've never seen that in use anywhere before. Taking >Guillem into Cc so maybe he can tell something about if Conflicts >or Breaks/Replaces are the better choice here.) > >I only see these hopefully only minor disadvantages of that latter >solution: > >* Users need to have uptodate buster-backports package, i.e. > 4.9.3-4~bpo10+2. If they don't upgrade to 4.9.3-4~bpo10+2 before > dist-upgrading and then upgrade with 4.9.3-4~bpo10+1 still being > installed, they will run into this issue again. Might be > something for the Release Notes. > >* I'm not sure if apt gets confused while trying to find a good > order for dist-upgrading if the Conflicts/Breaks/Replaces is in > the old package and not the to-be-upgraded-to one. I hopefully > think that this is no issue, but I'm Cc'ing the APT team for > input on that to be on the safe side. If I add the Conflicts as suggested and necessary, the same procedure suceeds, i.e. the update happens as expected and all intended packages (procps, psmics and the manpages-de, manpages-fr and manpages-pl) are present in their version as of testing. I'm now preparing the official upload to backports. Greetings Helge -- Dr. Helge Kreutzmann deb...@helgefjell.de Dipl.-Phys. http://www.helgefjell.de/debian.php 64bit GNU powered gpg signed mail preferred Help keep free software "libre": http://www.ffii.de/ signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Bug#989799: psmisc: Undeclared file conflict with manpages-de from buster-backports
Hello Axel, hello Craig, On Mon, Jun 14, 2021 at 12:19:17PM +0200, Axel Beckert wrote: > Craig Small wrote: > > reassign -1 manpages-de > > Might be the right place indeed, but maybe not in the way you'd > expect. See below. Ack. And thank you very much for your analysis and suggestions. > > > JFTR: What came to me after sending that mail and what I didn't check > > > so far, is if 4.9.3-4 is fine, but 4.9.3-4~bpo10+1 has those files. > > > > > > Actually in that case, I have no idea how the Breaks/Replaces headers > > > and the maintainer scripts need to look like. > > > > $ debdiff manpages-de_4.9.3-4_all.deb manpages-de_4.9.3-4_bpo10+1_all.deb | > > head > > [The following lists of changes regard files as different if they have > > different names, permissions or owners.] > > > > Files in second .deb but not in first > > - > > -rw-r--r-- root/root /usr/share/man/de/man1/fuser.1.gz > > -rw-r--r-- root/root /usr/share/man/de/man1/killall.1.gz > > -rw-r--r-- root/root /usr/share/man/de/man1/lzmainfo.1.gz > > -rw-r--r-- root/root /usr/share/man/de/man1/peekfd.1.gz > > -rw-r--r-- root/root /usr/share/man/de/man1/prtstat.1.gz > > > > There's about 20 "new" files and 20 removed files. > > > > For some reason, the backport version included files that clash with the > > procps and psmisc packages. The sid version on 4.9.3-4 doesn't have those > > conflicting files. > > This actually makes sense, because the backports version is targetted > for buster with psmisc/procps package versions which don't/still have > them. So the exclude/include list the buster-backports package is more > similar to the buster package than the bullseye package — just the > contents of the manpages is as up to date as the bullseye package. > > From that point of view, this is _not_ a bug in the manpages-de > package in buster-backports. (But it still might be the best option to > fix it in there.) > > Then again, dist-upgrades from buster with to bullseye should work > smoothly like without backports and it seems to be that the main > burden to make this sure lays in the backports-packages. > > I though still think that this is a serious (sic!) issue and it should > be fixed. > > Here's my analysis of the potential solutions I see: > > 1) If that Breaks/Replaces headers in psmisc (and probably procps) >would be bumped to "<< 4.9.3-4" it would also match the manpages-de >backports package, but then again, this would also match other >non-backports manpages-de package versions inbetween which don't >have these files. And I fear this would have any unwanted (and >potentially also RC-level) side effects. :-/ I see. But if we decide on the final version for unstable and backports, this should work, shouldn't it? > 2) So I wonder if the buster-backports package of manpages-de could >conflict with the psmisc and procps package in bullseye(*)? This >should probably take care that it is upgraded before procps and >psmisc are upgraded and hopefully solves the issue without too many >side-effects. > >(I'm not sure if Breaks/Replaces with ">>" or ">=" really work as >expected. I've never seen that in use anywhere before. Taking >Guillem into Cc so maybe he can tell something about if Conflicts >or Breaks/Replaces are the better choice here.) > >I only see these hopefully only minor disadvantages of that latter >solution: > >* Users need to have uptodate buster-backports package, i.e. > 4.9.3-4~bpo10+2. If they don't upgrade to 4.9.3-4~bpo10+2 before > dist-upgrading and then upgrade with 4.9.3-4~bpo10+1 still being > installed, they will run into this issue again. Might be > something for the Release Notes. I always remember that your system has to be up-to-date before the dist-upgrade and extra care was necessary for users of backports. Hence I would think this is reasonable. >* I'm not sure if apt gets confused while trying to find a good > order for dist-upgrading if the Conflicts/Breaks/Replaces is in > the old package and not the to-be-upgraded-to one. I hopefully > think that this is no issue, but I'm Cc'ing the APT team for > input on that to be on the safe side. If (and relly if) this works, then from a maintainers POV this would be the nicest solution. > 3) Only ship manpages in manpages-de in buster-backports which are in >psmisc/procps neither in buster nor in bullseye. I assume this is >the solution, Craig had in mind when reassigning the bug report. > >IMHO this is also a viable solution if variant 2) has too many side >effects as it IMHO only has a minor impact on the usability of the >manpages-de package in buster-backports. But this would partially defeat the purpose of the backport, to provide localized man pages where upstream did not. So from a maintainer POV I would prefer either solution 1) or 2). And as this situation will
Bug#989799: psmisc: Undeclared file conflict with manpages-de from buster-backports
Hello Craig, On Mon, Jun 14, 2021 at 06:35:19PM +1000, Craig Small wrote: > On Mon, 14 Jun 2021 at 18:04, Axel Beckert wrote: > > > JFTR: What came to me after sending that mail and what I didn't check > > so far, is if 4.9.3-4 is fine, but 4.9.3-4~bpo10+1 has those files. > > > > Actually in that case, I have no idea how the Breaks/Replaces headers > > and the maintainer scripts need to look like. > > > > $ debdiff manpages-de_4.9.3-4_all.deb manpages-de_4.9.3-4_bpo10+1_all.deb | > head > [The following lists of changes regard files as different if they have > different names, permissions or owners.] > > Files in second .deb but not in first > - > -rw-r--r-- root/root /usr/share/man/de/man1/fuser.1.gz > -rw-r--r-- root/root /usr/share/man/de/man1/killall.1.gz > -rw-r--r-- root/root /usr/share/man/de/man1/lzmainfo.1.gz > -rw-r--r-- root/root /usr/share/man/de/man1/peekfd.1.gz > -rw-r--r-- root/root /usr/share/man/de/man1/prtstat.1.gz > > There's about 20 "new" files and 20 removed files. > > For some reason, the backport version included files that clash with the > procps and psmisc packages. The sid version on 4.9.3-4 doesn't have those > conflicting files. That is on purpose. manpages-l10n has various flavours, one is tracking unstable, another one is tracking Buster (currently). Additionally, when translations are moving upstream, they get (manually, if needed be) removed from the version for unstable. So two cases may occur: 1. The translation status is different for unstable and buster. Then the localized man page may appear only in either unstable or buster. 2. Due to the moving of translations to upstream package, the translation may be contained in buster (where upstream did not contain the translation) and not in unstable (where upstream contains the translation and so its no longer present in manpages-l10n). Greetings Helge -- Dr. Helge Kreutzmann deb...@helgefjell.de Dipl.-Phys. http://www.helgefjell.de/debian.php 64bit GNU powered gpg signed mail preferred Help keep free software "libre": http://www.ffii.de/ signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Bug#989799: psmisc: Undeclared file conflict with manpages-de from buster-backports
Hello Craig, On Mon, Jun 14, 2021 at 11:41:56AM +1000, Craig Small wrote: > On Mon, 14 Jun 2021 at 00:03, Axel Beckert wrote: > > > So the Breaks and Replaces headers (c.f. #982059) should likely be > > against "<< 4.9.3-4", not just against "<< 4.9.1-1". > > > > It looks like both the psmisc and procps manpages came back from the dead. > They were removed in manpages-de 4.9.1-1 and all was good but then they > came back in 4.9.3 > Helge, the package maintainer for manpages-l10n, then removed them at > 4.9.3-4. Yes, I did a packaging error back then, which was fixed in -4. > > Is that how you see it Helge? I can re-release procps and psmisc with the > updated breaks/replaces but just making sure I hit the right version. > I agree with Axel, it looks like 4.9.3-4 is the right one to aim for now. > I assume that the just imported 4.10.0 won't have these files (again). Correct. The only change is the updated set of translations (at least in de). The "removal" is unchanged. Best greetings Helge -- Dr. Helge Kreutzmann deb...@helgefjell.de Dipl.-Phys. http://www.helgefjell.de/debian.php 64bit GNU powered gpg signed mail preferred Help keep free software "libre": http://www.ffii.de/ signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Bug#989799: psmisc: Undeclared file conflict with manpages-de from buster-backports
Hi Craig and Helge, Craig Small wrote: > reassign -1 manpages-de Might be the right place indeed, but maybe not in the way you'd expect. See below. > > JFTR: What came to me after sending that mail and what I didn't check > > so far, is if 4.9.3-4 is fine, but 4.9.3-4~bpo10+1 has those files. > > > > Actually in that case, I have no idea how the Breaks/Replaces headers > > and the maintainer scripts need to look like. > > $ debdiff manpages-de_4.9.3-4_all.deb manpages-de_4.9.3-4_bpo10+1_all.deb | > head > [The following lists of changes regard files as different if they have > different names, permissions or owners.] > > Files in second .deb but not in first > - > -rw-r--r-- root/root /usr/share/man/de/man1/fuser.1.gz > -rw-r--r-- root/root /usr/share/man/de/man1/killall.1.gz > -rw-r--r-- root/root /usr/share/man/de/man1/lzmainfo.1.gz > -rw-r--r-- root/root /usr/share/man/de/man1/peekfd.1.gz > -rw-r--r-- root/root /usr/share/man/de/man1/prtstat.1.gz > > There's about 20 "new" files and 20 removed files. > > For some reason, the backport version included files that clash with the > procps and psmisc packages. The sid version on 4.9.3-4 doesn't have those > conflicting files. This actually makes sense, because the backports version is targetted for buster with psmisc/procps package versions which don't/still have them. So the exclude/include list the buster-backports package is more similar to the buster package than the bullseye package — just the contents of the manpages is as up to date as the bullseye package. >From that point of view, this is _not_ a bug in the manpages-de package in buster-backports. (But it still might be the best option to fix it in there.) Then again, dist-upgrades from buster with to bullseye should work smoothly like without backports and it seems to be that the main burden to make this sure lays in the backports-packages. I though still think that this is a serious (sic!) issue and it should be fixed. Here's my analysis of the potential solutions I see: 1) If that Breaks/Replaces headers in psmisc (and probably procps) would be bumped to "<< 4.9.3-4" it would also match the manpages-de backports package, but then again, this would also match other non-backports manpages-de package versions inbetween which don't have these files. And I fear this would have any unwanted (and potentially also RC-level) side effects. :-/ 2) So I wonder if the buster-backports package of manpages-de could conflict with the psmisc and procps package in bullseye(*)? This should probably take care that it is upgraded before procps and psmisc are upgraded and hopefully solves the issue without too many side-effects. (I'm not sure if Breaks/Replaces with ">>" or ">=" really work as expected. I've never seen that in use anywhere before. Taking Guillem into Cc so maybe he can tell something about if Conflicts or Breaks/Replaces are the better choice here.) I only see these hopefully only minor disadvantages of that latter solution: * Users need to have uptodate buster-backports package, i.e. 4.9.3-4~bpo10+2. If they don't upgrade to 4.9.3-4~bpo10+2 before dist-upgrading and then upgrade with 4.9.3-4~bpo10+1 still being installed, they will run into this issue again. Might be something for the Release Notes. * I'm not sure if apt gets confused while trying to find a good order for dist-upgrading if the Conflicts/Breaks/Replaces is in the old package and not the to-be-upgraded-to one. I hopefully think that this is no issue, but I'm Cc'ing the APT team for input on that to be on the safe side. 3) Only ship manpages in manpages-de in buster-backports which are in psmisc/procps neither in buster nor in bullseye. I assume this is the solution, Craig had in mind when reassigning the bug report. IMHO this is also a viable solution if variant 2) has too many side effects as it IMHO only has a minor impact on the usability of the manpages-de package in buster-backports. Footnotes: (*) buster-backports neither seems to have psmisc nor procps which surely makes this issue less complicated than it could be. :-) Regards, Axel -- ,''`. | Axel Beckert , https://people.debian.org/~abe/ : :' : | Debian Developer, ftp.ch.debian.org Admin `. `' | 4096R: 2517 B724 C5F6 CA99 5329 6E61 2FF9 CD59 6126 16B5 `-| 1024D: F067 EA27 26B9 C3FC 1486 202E C09E 1D89 9593 0EDE
Bug#989799: psmisc: Undeclared file conflict with manpages-de from buster-backports
reassign -1 manpages-de On Mon, 14 Jun 2021 at 18:04, Axel Beckert wrote: > JFTR: What came to me after sending that mail and what I didn't check > so far, is if 4.9.3-4 is fine, but 4.9.3-4~bpo10+1 has those files. > > Actually in that case, I have no idea how the Breaks/Replaces headers > and the maintainer scripts need to look like. > $ debdiff manpages-de_4.9.3-4_all.deb manpages-de_4.9.3-4_bpo10+1_all.deb | head [The following lists of changes regard files as different if they have different names, permissions or owners.] Files in second .deb but not in first - -rw-r--r-- root/root /usr/share/man/de/man1/fuser.1.gz -rw-r--r-- root/root /usr/share/man/de/man1/killall.1.gz -rw-r--r-- root/root /usr/share/man/de/man1/lzmainfo.1.gz -rw-r--r-- root/root /usr/share/man/de/man1/peekfd.1.gz -rw-r--r-- root/root /usr/share/man/de/man1/prtstat.1.gz There's about 20 "new" files and 20 removed files. For some reason, the backport version included files that clash with the procps and psmisc packages. The sid version on 4.9.3-4 doesn't have those conflicting files. - Craig
Bug#989799: psmisc: Undeclared file conflict with manpages-de from buster-backports
Hi, Craig Small wrote: > On Mon, 14 Jun 2021 at 00:03, Axel Beckert wrote: > > So the Breaks and Replaces headers (c.f. #982059) should likely be > > against "<< 4.9.3-4", not just against "<< 4.9.1-1". > > It looks like both the psmisc and procps manpages came back from the dead. > They were removed in manpages-de 4.9.1-1 and all was good but then they > came back in 4.9.3 JFTR: What came to me after sending that mail and what I didn't check so far, is if 4.9.3-4 is fine, but 4.9.3-4~bpo10+1 has those files. Actually in that case, I have no idea how the Breaks/Replaces headers and the maintainer scripts need to look like. Regards, Axel -- ,''`. | Axel Beckert , https://people.debian.org/~abe/ : :' : | Debian Developer, ftp.ch.debian.org Admin `. `' | 4096R: 2517 B724 C5F6 CA99 5329 6E61 2FF9 CD59 6126 16B5 `-| 1024D: F067 EA27 26B9 C3FC 1486 202E C09E 1D89 9593 0EDE
Bug#989799: psmisc: Undeclared file conflict with manpages-de from buster-backports
On Mon, 14 Jun 2021 at 00:03, Axel Beckert wrote: > So the Breaks and Replaces headers (c.f. #982059) should likely be > against "<< 4.9.3-4", not just against "<< 4.9.1-1". > It looks like both the psmisc and procps manpages came back from the dead. They were removed in manpages-de 4.9.1-1 and all was good but then they came back in 4.9.3 Helge, the package maintainer for manpages-l10n, then removed them at 4.9.3-4. Is that how you see it Helge? I can re-release procps and psmisc with the updated breaks/replaces but just making sure I hit the right version. I agree with Axel, it looks like 4.9.3-4 is the right one to aim for now. I assume that the just imported 4.10.0 won't have these files (again). - Craig
Bug#989799: psmisc: Undeclared file conflict with manpages-de from buster-backports
Package: psmisc Version: 23.4-2 Severity: serious A non-english speaking friend did a dist-upgrade of a laptop from buster + buster-backports to bullseye and it failed at psmisc as follows (German locale): dpkg: Fehler beim Bearbeiten des Archivs /tmp/apt-dpkg-install-AvDBUc/0-psmisc_23.4-2_amd64.deb (--unpack): Versuch, »/usr/share/man/de/man1/fuser.1.gz« zu überschreiben, welches auch in Paket manpages-de 4.9.3-4~bpo10+1 ist So the Breaks and Replaces headers (c.f. #982059) should likely be against "<< 4.9.3-4", not just against "<< 4.9.1-1". -- System Information: Debian Release: 11.0 APT prefers bullseye Architecture: amd64 (x86_64)
