Re: Replacing a binary package by another one(was: Communication issue?)
On Wed, Sep 04, 2013 at 12:55:46PM -0500, Peter Samuelson wrote: > [Norbert Preining] > > On Di, 03 Sep 2013, Peter Samuelson wrote: > > > texlive-lang-european? It doesn't look like it to me (no Breaks or > > > Conflicts), but I haven't actually tried it. > > conflicts there are, texlive-base conflicts with all the old packages. > I misspoke. There is a Conflicts in texlive-base, but what is probably > needed is Provides in texlive-lang-european. As I understand it, that > will prompt apt to DTRT on upgrade. Unless apt has gotten smarter recently (which is not out of the question), no. It's a common misconception that apt will care about Provides/Replaces for selecting new packages on dist-upgrade, but while it seems like a nice idea, TTBOMK it's never been implemented. -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. Ubuntu Developerhttp://www.debian.org/ slanga...@ubuntu.com vor...@debian.org signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Replacing a binary package by another one(was: Communication issue?)
[Norbert Preining] > On Di, 03 Sep 2013, Peter Samuelson wrote: > > texlive-lang-european? It doesn't look like it to me (no Breaks or > > Conflicts), but I haven't actually tried it. > > conflicts there are, texlive-base conflicts with all the old packages. I misspoke. There is a Conflicts in texlive-base, but what is probably needed is Provides in texlive-lang-european. As I understand it, that will prompt apt to DTRT on upgrade. Since nobody is worried about versioned dependencies here, I think that would suffice. No need for 30 transitional packages. But I haven't tested it. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20130904175546.ge6...@p12n.org
Re: Replacing a binary package by another one(was: Communication issue?)
On Mi, 04 Sep 2013, Lucas Nussbaum wrote: > > > requirements to support clean upgrades between Debian releases. > - texlive-lang-danish gets removed (as well as texlive-common > and texlive-doc-base), but texlive-lang-european doesn't get > installed. Yes, and? Was the dist-upgrade disturbed? We are talking about normal systems, that is having telxive or texlive-full installed. Not pathological cases of only t-l-d installed. > You need transitional packages here. I *can* provide transitional packages to make it nice for the user experience. I don't remember a requirement in the Debian policy for that. Norbert PREINING, Norbert http://www.preining.info JAIST, Japan TeX Live & Debian Developer DSA: 0x09C5B094 fp: 14DF 2E6C 0307 BE6D AD76 A9C0 D2BF 4AA3 09C5 B094 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20130904110416.gc12...@gamma.logic.tuwien.ac.at
Re: Replacing a binary package by another one(was: Communication issue?)
On 04/09/13 at 12:13 +0900, Norbert Preining wrote: > On Mi, 04 Sep 2013, Ben Hutchings wrote: > > How much do those packages weigh, Norbert? Are TeX transitional > > packages particularly heavy? > > In kg? In bit? In work time? > > > I really don't know why you think TeX is exempt from the usual > > requirements to support clean upgrades between Debian releases. > > Please try it before complaining. Clean upgrades are working with > dist-upgrade I tried: - in wheezy, install texlive-lang-danish - change sources.list to point to sid - apt-get update ; apt-get dist-upgrade - texlive-lang-danish gets removed (as well as texlive-common and texlive-doc-base), but texlive-lang-european doesn't get installed. You need transitional packages here. Lucas -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20130904105800.ga28...@xanadu.blop.info
Re: Replacing a binary package by another one(was: Communication issue?)
On Mi, 04 Sep 2013, Ben Hutchings wrote: > How much do those packages weigh, Norbert? Are TeX transitional > packages particularly heavy? In kg? In bit? In work time? > I really don't know why you think TeX is exempt from the usual > requirements to support clean upgrades between Debian releases. Please try it before complaining. Clean upgrades are working with dist-upgrade And now I leave this discussion, I have enough of it. I complained about a *serious* bug not being fixed although patches and fixes are known, and at the end it is me hahahahaha. Go and have fun yourself. Norbert PREINING, Norbert http://www.preining.info JAIST, Japan TeX Live & Debian Developer DSA: 0x09C5B094 fp: 14DF 2E6C 0307 BE6D AD76 A9C0 D2BF 4AA3 09C5 B094 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20130904031316.gi27...@gamma.logic.tuwien.ac.at
Re: Replacing a binary package by another one(was: Communication issue?)
On Wed, 2013-09-04 at 10:57 +0900, Norbert Preining wrote: > On Di, 03 Sep 2013, Peter Samuelson wrote: > > texlive-lang-european? It doesn't look like it to me (no Breaks or > > Conflicts), but I haven't actually tried it. > > conflicts there are, texlive-base conflicts with all the old packages. > > TL2013 made big changes to the naming of packages. If I go down > the road you suggest I have to introduce about 30 transitional > packages ... > > Simple answer: No. > > If someone wants to, I am fine to hand over the maintainance of TL > to those who think they can handle it. > > I will not carry 30+ transitional packages. How much do those packages weigh, Norbert? Are TeX transitional packages particularly heavy? I really don't know why you think TeX is exempt from the usual requirements to support clean upgrades between Debian releases. Ben. -- Ben Hutchings If you seem to know what you are doing, you'll be given more to do. signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: Replacing a binary package by another one(was: Communication issue?)
On Di, 03 Sep 2013, Peter Samuelson wrote: > texlive-lang-european? It doesn't look like it to me (no Breaks or > Conflicts), but I haven't actually tried it. conflicts there are, texlive-base conflicts with all the old packages. TL2013 made big changes to the naming of packages. If I go down the road you suggest I have to introduce about 30 transitional packages ... Simple answer: No. If someone wants to, I am fine to hand over the maintainance of TL to those who think they can handle it. I will not carry 30+ transitional packages. Norbert PREINING, Norbert http://www.preining.info JAIST, Japan TeX Live & Debian Developer DSA: 0x09C5B094 fp: 14DF 2E6C 0307 BE6D AD76 A9C0 D2BF 4AA3 09C5 B094 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20130904015741.gf27...@gamma.logic.tuwien.ac.at
Re: Replacing a binary package by another one(was: Communication issue?)
> > Sounds like you are saying 'texlive-lang-danish' is only useful as a > > package dependency - in other words, users would never install it > > explicitly because they want its functionality. Is that correct? This [Norbert Preining] > I never said that. The functionality is now in > texlive-lang-european I can see that. But your argument for removing texlive-lang-danish etc. is basically "there are almost no rdeps". But that is only half the story. The other half is to explain what will happen to users who installed texlive-lang-danish because they want Danish language hyphenation support. When they upgrade, will they get texlive-lang-european? It doesn't look like it to me (no Breaks or Conflicts), but I haven't actually tried it. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20130904014326.gd6...@p12n.org
Re: Replacing a binary package by another one(was: Communication issue?)
On Di, 03 Sep 2013, Peter Samuelson wrote: > Sounds like you are saying 'texlive-lang-danish' is only useful as a > package dependency - in other words, users would never install it > explicitly because they want its functionality. Is that correct? This I never said that. The functionality is now in texlive-lang-european Norbert PREINING, Norbert http://www.preining.info JAIST, Japan TeX Live & Debian Developer DSA: 0x09C5B094 fp: 14DF 2E6C 0307 BE6D AD76 A9C0 D2BF 4AA3 09C5 B094 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20130904012639.ge27...@gamma.logic.tuwien.ac.at
Re: Replacing a binary package by another one(was: Communication issue?)
[Norbert Preining] > I understood your proposal, of course. Still, since there are no rdepends > besides very few (1?) build-depends on these two packages, I consider > it a a waste of resources. Sounds like you are saying 'texlive-lang-danish' is only useful as a package dependency - in other words, users would never install it explicitly because they want its functionality. Is that correct? This is not clear from the package description, which at least to me looks like something users _would_ install explicitly: Description-en: TeX Live: Danish Support for typesetting Danish. . This package includes the following CTAN packages: hyphen-danish -- Danish hyphenation patterns. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20130903234245.gc6...@p12n.org
Re: Replacing a binary package by another one(was: Communication issue?)
Hi David, On Di, 03 Sep 2013, David Prévot wrote: > I was directly proposing that, instead of silently removing the > texlive-lang-danish — and at least texlive-lang-norwegian — binary > packages, they could be added back as dummy transitional packages I understood your proposal, of course. Still, since there are no rdepends besides very few (1?) build-depends on these two packages, I consider it a a waste of resources. I repeat my point, these changes happen on major upgrades. If many packages are concerned, a mass bug filing is the way to go. Since we are talking about *one* package that in addition is extremly simple to fix, I don't consider it useful or necessary to provide transitional packages. dist-upgrade will remove these packages during upgrade from stable to next-stable, so nothing to worry. > I’ve witnessed many such transitions, they even usually are kept in the > following stable release (so stable-to-stable upgrades are not too > disruptive for those third parties, and our users). I failed to come up Nothing disruptive here, dist-upgrade removes conflicting packages that have no dependencies anymore. Norbert PREINING, Norbert http://www.preining.info JAIST, Japan TeX Live & Debian Developer DSA: 0x09C5B094 fp: 14DF 2E6C 0307 BE6D AD76 A9C0 D2BF 4AA3 09C5 B094 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20130903231946.ga26...@gamma.logic.tuwien.ac.at
