Bug#683847: unblock: sgml-base/1.26+nmu4
On Mon, 2013-03-18 at 09:57 +0100, Helmut Grohne wrote: > The real problems are not related to upgrading/installing/removing. They > are related to using sgml tools. As far as I understand converting an > xml file using xmlto should discover some of the issues. Errors that > point to sgml-base failures are either catalog files that do not exist > or missing definitions (because the catalogs are not listed). As promised, I've been having a look at this again. I've run some tests today, but need to be offline for several hours now. The results so far are included below; I'll pick up testing again tomorrow. > To trigger sgml-base related issues in wheezy try one of the following: > * Remove but not purge a sgml-base rdep. Observe missing files errors >from sgml tools. #676717 Confirmed that installing w3c-dtd-xhtml and removing it causes this with +nmu3. > * Upgrade squeeze -> wheezy without upgrading dpkg (or upgrading dpkg >late). Observe missing definitions from sgml tools. #678902 Repeatedly installing and purging debiandoc-sgml appears to reliably trigger (no pun intended) this in my testing with squeeze's dpkg and +nmu3. I've not managed to reproduce it with wheezy's dpkg and +nmu4. > * Install squeeze. Install a sgml-base rdep. Remove it (not purge). >Upgrade the system to wheezy. Now install it again. Observe a >conffile prompt. I've not tested this one yet, as I forgot to do it before upgrading the chroot. > * Just upgrade squeeze -> wheezy. Observe noise about rebuilding >packages that are already rebuilt. Yep. The noise isn't the end of the world though. Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1365260507.15666.19.ca...@jacala.jungle.funky-badger.org
Bug#683847: unblock: sgml-base/1.26+nmu4
On Sun, Mar 17, 2013 at 12:14:24AM +, Adam D. Barratt wrote: > So, having procrastinated on this for far too long, I did some tests. Thanks for looking into this. > Starting from a freshly debootstrapped squeeze chroot with > gnome-desktop-environment installed, I added a local repo containing > just sgml-base from sid and dist-upgraded. This /should/ not be a way to discover issues nor to discover differences between 1.26+nmu{3,4}. (Besides noise during nmu3 triggers.) > Unfortunately I don't have a typescript to check for any warning > messages, but the dist-upgrade completed without any apparent issues. Thanks. But this test is not that useful for sgml-base. All you would be seeing here had you upgraded to just wheezy would be noisy "please rebuild" messaged emitted from preinst calls to update-catalog by packages being upgraded. The real problems are not related to upgrading/installing/removing. They are related to using sgml tools. As far as I understand converting an xml file using xmlto should discover some of the issues. Errors that point to sgml-base failures are either catalog files that do not exist or missing definitions (because the catalogs are not listed). To trigger sgml-base related issues in wheezy try one of the following: * Remove but not purge a sgml-base rdep. Observe missing files errors from sgml tools. #676717 * Upgrade squeeze -> wheezy without upgrading dpkg (or upgrading dpkg late). Observe missing definitions from sgml tools. #678902 * Install squeeze. Install a sgml-base rdep. Remove it (not purge). Upgrade the system to wheezy. Now install it again. Observe a conffile prompt. * Just upgrade squeeze -> wheezy. Observe noise about rebuilding packages that are already rebuilt. As the NMUer of sgml-base I recommend to the release team to unblock sgml-base, because it fixes real issues and has not shown any new issues in the past months. The changes I made were minimal to the best of my knowledge and in the spirit of RC bug fixes and freeze policy. I am happy to attempt different solutions at your preference. In my opinion at least the first two issues mentioned above must be fixed for wheezy and the sid version does that. Please don't hesitate to bug me with further questions. Helmut signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Bug#683847: unblock: sgml-base/1.26+nmu4
On Tue, 2012-10-09 at 11:43 +0200, Julien Cristau wrote: > I'm not interested in "you are on sid" so much as "you're upgrading from > squeeze to wheezy". And considering the amount of bugs this whole thing > has uncovered (whether in the transition stuff itself, in dpkg, or > somewhere else) I'm fairly convinced this whole thing is in the "not > worth it" category. And even in the "you've already upgraded" > situation, dpkg's failing at trigger handling means I'm fairly nervous > about the next dist-upgrade. So, having procrastinated on this for far too long, I did some tests. Starting from a freshly debootstrapped squeeze chroot with gnome-desktop-environment installed, I added a local repo containing just sgml-base from sid and dist-upgraded. Unfortunately I don't have a typescript to check for any warning messages, but the dist-upgrade completed without any apparent issues. Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1363479264.2662.33.ca...@jacala.jungle.funky-badger.org
Bug#683847: unblock: sgml-base/1.26+nmu4
Hello, On 24.12.2012 17:50, Adam D. Barratt wrote: On 09.10.2012 08:10, Helmut Grohne wrote: On Tue, Oct 09, 2012 at 09:15:32AM +0200, Raphael Hertzog wrote: On Mon, 08 Oct 2012, Helmut Grohne wrote: > 1) Add a pre-dependency on dpkg such that dpkg is already upgraded > before deconfiguring sgml-base. This does not guarantee to solve the > issue, because the old dpkg may still be running, but it makes it > highly unlikely. IIRC when apt upgrades dpkg, it configures it immediately so that any package processed after dpkg is guaranteed to be processed by the upgraded dpkg. Thanks for the explanation. Do you also know whether aptitude and cupt show the same behaviour? CCing the relevant maintainers. Thanks for caring. As for (lib)cupt, newest/latest dpkg is invoked for every new action group. Dpkg is essential, therefore it cannot have circular dependencies, therefore it's guaranteed to be the only package in the action group. In other words, I believe "any package processed after dpkg is guaranteed to be processed by the upgraded dpkg" is true. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/50d89bcb.8050...@debian.org
Bug#683847: unblock: sgml-base/1.26+nmu4
On 09.10.2012 08:10, Helmut Grohne wrote: On Tue, Oct 09, 2012 at 09:15:32AM +0200, Raphael Hertzog wrote: On Mon, 08 Oct 2012, Helmut Grohne wrote: > 1) Add a pre-dependency on dpkg such that dpkg is already upgraded >before deconfiguring sgml-base. This does not guarantee to solve the >issue, because the old dpkg may still be running, but it makes it >highly unlikely. IIRC when apt upgrades dpkg, it configures it immediately so that any package processed after dpkg is guaranteed to be processed by the upgraded dpkg. Thanks for the explanation. Do you also know whether aptitude and cupt show the same behaviour? CCing the relevant maintainers. Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/99422d78dd60b6303acdaeea9cba7...@mail.adsl.funky-badger.org
Bug#683847: unblock: sgml-base/1.26+nmu4
[Dropping Adam from CC since he should receive this Mail via the bug report as well.] On Tue, Dec 18, 2012 at 04:44:28PM +, Adam D. Barratt wrote: > Apologies if I missed it, but is there somewhere a concise and > current list of the remaining issues affecting: I don't think that there is such a list. Thank you for bringing this up. > a) packages in sid I am not aware of any release critical issues affecting a fresh sid install of sgml-base. > b) packages in wheezy >From the original unblock: | #676717: sgml-base produces broken super catalog when packages are in | "rc" state This issue affects wheezy as is. It can be reproduced by installing a reverse dependency of sgml-base and then removing but not purging it. > c) the squeeze to wheezy upgrade process >From the original unblock: | #678902: sgml-base needs to Pre-Depend on dpkg 1.16.4 This issue can be reproduced by upgrading sgml-base and its reverse dependencies very early and only then upgrading dpkg. In that case the triggers will not run in correct order and some package catalogs will be missing from the super catalog. In addition some packages are not yet built with the most recent version of debhelper which fixes #681194. This bug can be triggered in any package that uses dh_installcatalogs by installing it in squeeze, removing it, upgrading the rest of the system to wheezy and installing the package again. In this case a conffile prompt will show up even though the user did not change the package. The solution to this kind of problem is a rebuild of the affected package against a more recent version of debhelper. A notable exception here is xml2rfc, which was even buggier in this respect (#680291), but is already fixed in wheezy. Finally there is a theoretical issue I was unable to reproduce. It has no bug report associated, but is mentioned on http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=678902#62. The issue supposed being that sgml-base uses a perl feature that is not present in squeeze and in that case could generate an empty super catalog. I did not NMU the package for this possible issue, but prepared a trivial fix (added versioned dependency on perl http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=678902#72). Just highlighting this here for completeness. If you believe that this should be fixed, I can turn it into an RC bug and fix it. Not an RC bug, but Julien Cristau complained about misleading warning messages during package upgrades. Those are removed in the sid version. To the best of my knowledge this is an exhaustive list of issues concerning sgml-base. If you have further questions please don't hesitate to ask. Helmut -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20121219093739.ga31...@alf.mars
Bug#683847: unblock: sgml-base/1.26+nmu4
On 06.12.2012 17:50, Adam D. Barratt wrote: On 29.11.2012 13:46, Helmut Grohne wrote: Will wheezy ship sgml catalogs as configuration files or as conffiles? I am explicitly deferring this question to the release managers now. There is no obviously correct answer, but we can only solve problems For the avoidance of any doubt - we're aware that this needs resolving, but I at least have not yet had chance to find a sufficiently contiguous block of uninterrupted free time to properly consider all of the issues involved. Apologies if I missed it, but is there somewhere a concise and current list of the remaining issues affecting: a) packages in sid b) packages in wheezy c) the squeeze to wheezy upgrade process ? Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/085b7555f27c498037dd0bd1bb9ed...@mail.adsl.funky-badger.org
Bug#683847: unblock: sgml-base/1.26+nmu4
[dropping explicit CCs to people who I know read -release] On 29.11.2012 13:46, Helmut Grohne wrote: Will wheezy ship sgml catalogs as configuration files or as conffiles? I am explicitly deferring this question to the release managers now. There is no obviously correct answer, but we can only solve problems For the avoidance of any doubt - we're aware that this needs resolving, but I at least have not yet had chance to find a sufficiently contiguous block of uninterrupted free time to properly consider all of the issues involved. Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/0f808d6e9b2a41a85e8815e7ec03d...@mail.adsl.funky-badger.org
Bug#683847: unblock: sgml-base/1.26+nmu4
Thanks for pinging the issue. On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 09:20:38PM -0500, Samuel Bronson wrote: > Anyway, *someone* should probably do *something* here... Just what? As far as I can see the most fundamental question has not received a final answer: Will wheezy ship sgml catalogs as configuration files or as conffiles? I am explicitly deferring this question to the release managers now. There is no obviously correct answer, but we can only solve problems after there is an answer. If you (release team) need more insight into the issue(s), feel free to ask me via mail or irc (helmut). Helmut -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20121129134614.ga28...@alf.mars
Bug#683847: unblock: sgml-base/1.26+nmu4
Julien Cristau writes: > On Tue, Oct 9, 2012 at 10:56:41 +0200, Helmut Grohne wrote: > >> On Tue, Oct 09, 2012 at 09:23:20AM +0200, Julien Cristau wrote: >> > Get rid of the triggers and get back to something that actually works. >> >> I believe that you are a bit late into this discussion. Initially I >> proposed[63] a solution not involving triggers in the spirit of minimal >> changes. Then Daniel Leidert being a member of the XML/SGML Group >> requested[78] that the package catalogs be created at build time and be >> shipped as conffiles. Later Joey Hess[164] requested that the central >> catalog be generated using triggers. At that time both requests made >> sense (and to me they still do). There were no objections and I did not >> see the dpkg conffile trigger issue #676062 coming. So I implemented >> both. >> >> The current state is that there are no non-transition issues left. Once >> you are on sid, there are no sgml-base specific rc bugs affecting you. >> Going "back" will not make the transitioning part any easier. At least I >> don't see how that would work, but maybe your yet hidden solution can >> surprise me? >> > I'm not interested in "you are on sid" so much as "you're upgrading from > squeeze to wheezy". And considering the amount of bugs this whole thing > has uncovered (whether in the transition stuff itself, in dpkg, or > somewhere else) I'm fairly convinced this whole thing is in the "not > worth it" category. And even in the "you've already upgraded" > situation, dpkg's failing at trigger handling means I'm fairly nervous > about the next dist-upgrade. Well, considering that we never actually *had* anything that worked, and that the transition in question is complete *in wheezy* (the only remaining calls to update-catalog in maintscripts are in sgml-base's own postinst and prerm scripts), what you're asking for amounts to a *new* transition, in which we: 1. Patch debhelper *again*, * putting back the update-catalog calls * possibly adding code to transition /etc/*.cat away from being conffiles (you wouldn't want to break those of us already *on* wheezy, would you?) * but still making sure not to trash the user's edits to those file like we used to 2. In coordination, remove the triggers from sgml-base 3. bin-NMU sgml-base's rdepends *again* to get all that hairy logic back into the maintscripts (Note that I'm using "we" and "us" in a strange way that only includes myself in capacities like "being on wheezy"; no way am I smart enough to concoct working debhelper fragments for this, or figure out how to zap the triggers without breaking anything...) And furthermore, if the new mainscript fragments turn out to be buggy (which seems likely, considering how hairy the things you're asking them to do are) it will be necessary to *repeat* tasks 1 and 3, possibly more than once! And all this, just to avoid a Pre-Depends: dpkg (>= version), which seems to be a fairly well-accepted sort of pre-depends for packages sufficiently well away from the transitive closure of the essential packages? Anyway, *someone* should probably do *something* here... -- Hi! I'm a .signature virus! Copy me into your ~/.signature to help me spread! -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/87a9u28o3t@naesten.dyndns.org
Bug#683847: unblock: sgml-base/1.26+nmu4
On Tue, Oct 09, 2012 at 11:43:19AM +0200, Julien Cristau wrote: > I'm not interested in "you are on sid" so much as "you're upgrading from > squeeze to wheezy". And considering the amount of bugs this whole thing > has uncovered (whether in the transition stuff itself, in dpkg, or > somewhere else) I'm fairly convinced this whole thing is in the "not > worth it" category. And even in the "you've already upgraded" > situation, dpkg's failing at trigger handling means I'm fairly nervous > about the next dist-upgrade. I do see your reasoning here. On the bright side, I can say that the stream of bugs seems to have stopped. During the last two months the only new thing that popped up was a revival of #680291 which is due to xml2rfc being buggy in squeeze. It is not the case that our previous state worked that well. Instead what we see here is simultaneous rising of quality levels by doing more extensive piuparts tests and declaring failures as rc instead of important. > Not blaming you, as you couldn't have predicted most of these bugs, just > saying at some point you have to stop the trainwreck. Thanks. What I fail to see here is how to stop the trainwreck. You cannot simply take the squeeze packages, bump their versions and upload. That would severely break sid and wheezy. You would have to reverse the transition. So what I am suggesting here is that the brake is the worse option in terms of breakage to wheezy. Note that even though I invested a fair amount of time in developing the trigger based sgml-base catalog update, I am trying not to be biased by having that work done. If you can show me a different solution, I will try to have an honest look. "go back" is just too vague to count as a solution at this point. Helmut -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20121009100115.ga12...@alf.mars
Bug#683847: unblock: sgml-base/1.26+nmu4
On Tue, Oct 9, 2012 at 10:56:41 +0200, Helmut Grohne wrote: > On Tue, Oct 09, 2012 at 09:23:20AM +0200, Julien Cristau wrote: > > Get rid of the triggers and get back to something that actually works. > > I believe that you are a bit late into this discussion. Initially I > proposed[63] a solution not involving triggers in the spirit of minimal > changes. Then Daniel Leidert being a member of the XML/SGML Group > requested[78] that the package catalogs be created at build time and be > shipped as conffiles. Later Joey Hess[164] requested that the central > catalog be generated using triggers. At that time both requests made > sense (and to me they still do). There were no objections and I did not > see the dpkg conffile trigger issue #676062 coming. So I implemented > both. > > The current state is that there are no non-transition issues left. Once > you are on sid, there are no sgml-base specific rc bugs affecting you. > Going "back" will not make the transitioning part any easier. At least I > don't see how that would work, but maybe your yet hidden solution can > surprise me? > I'm not interested in "you are on sid" so much as "you're upgrading from squeeze to wheezy". And considering the amount of bugs this whole thing has uncovered (whether in the transition stuff itself, in dpkg, or somewhere else) I'm fairly convinced this whole thing is in the "not worth it" category. And even in the "you've already upgraded" situation, dpkg's failing at trigger handling means I'm fairly nervous about the next dist-upgrade. Not blaming you, as you couldn't have predicted most of these bugs, just saying at some point you have to stop the trainwreck. Cheers, Julien signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Bug#683847: unblock: sgml-base/1.26+nmu4
On Tue, Oct 09, 2012 at 09:15:32AM +0200, Raphael Hertzog wrote: > On Mon, 08 Oct 2012, Helmut Grohne wrote: > > 1) Add a pre-dependency on dpkg such that dpkg is already upgraded > >before deconfiguring sgml-base. This does not guarantee to solve the > >issue, because the old dpkg may still be running, but it makes it > >highly unlikely. > > IIRC when apt upgrades dpkg, it configures it immediately so that any > package processed after dpkg is guaranteed to be processed by the upgraded > dpkg. Thanks for the explanation. Do you also know whether aptitude and cupt show the same behaviour? In any case the conclusion should be that the pre-dependency sufficiently solves the issue. Helmut -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20121009081031.ga30...@alf.mars
Bug#683847: unblock: sgml-base/1.26+nmu4
On Tue, Oct 09, 2012 at 09:23:20AM +0200, Julien Cristau wrote: > Get rid of the triggers and get back to something that actually works. I believe that you are a bit late into this discussion. Initially I proposed[63] a solution not involving triggers in the spirit of minimal changes. Then Daniel Leidert being a member of the XML/SGML Group requested[78] that the package catalogs be created at build time and be shipped as conffiles. Later Joey Hess[164] requested that the central catalog be generated using triggers. At that time both requests made sense (and to me they still do). There were no objections and I did not see the dpkg conffile trigger issue #676062 coming. So I implemented both. The current state is that there are no non-transition issues left. Once you are on sid, there are no sgml-base specific rc bugs affecting you. Going "back" will not make the transitioning part any easier. At least I don't see how that would work, but maybe your yet hidden solution can surprise me? Helmut [63]: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=477751#63 [78]: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=477751#78 [164]: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=477751#164 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20121009085641.gb30...@alf.mars
Bug#683847: unblock: sgml-base/1.26+nmu4
On Mon, Oct 8, 2012 at 13:13:07 +0200, Helmut Grohne wrote: > 4) Your solution? > Get rid of the triggers and get back to something that actually works. Cheers, Julien signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Bug#683847: unblock: sgml-base/1.26+nmu4
On Mon, 08 Oct 2012, Helmut Grohne wrote: > 1) Add a pre-dependency on dpkg such that dpkg is already upgraded >before deconfiguring sgml-base. This does not guarantee to solve the >issue, because the old dpkg may still be running, but it makes it >highly unlikely. IIRC when apt upgrades dpkg, it configures it immediately so that any package processed after dpkg is guaranteed to be processed by the upgraded dpkg. Cheers, -- Raphaël Hertzog ◈ Debian Developer Get the Debian Administrator's Handbook: → http://debian-handbook.info/get/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20121009071532.gf3...@x230-buxy.home.ouaza.com
Bug#683847: unblock: sgml-base/1.26+nmu4
On Mon, Oct 08, 2012 at 12:49:57PM +0200, Julien Cristau wrote: > On Sun, Oct 7, 2012 at 22:20:54 +0200, Helmut Grohne wrote: > > In addition a number of people on #-mentors suggested that a > > Pre-Dependency on dpkg shouldn't be too bad since dpkg should be > > upgraded early in any case. > > Sounds like a myth to me. Reference? It may be a myth. "suggested" is no evidence, but more like a guess. I just listed it as an explanation for my reasoning. Since #-mentors is not a logged channel, I cannot provide a reference, besides desktop-base[1]. Maybe we can move to more technical grounds and find a suitable solution there? So initially the reason for the pre-dependency was #678902. The reason is that an old version of dpkg invokes the trigger before the conffile is present which results in the conffile not being listed in /etc/sgml/catalog. In my view there is no doubt of the RC-ness of this issue. So what would be your preferred resolution? 1) Add a pre-dependency on dpkg such that dpkg is already upgraded before deconfiguring sgml-base. This does not guarantee to solve the issue, because the old dpkg may still be running, but it makes it highly unlikely. 2) Fix dpkg to invoke all triggers when upgrading to the fixed version. I do not see this happening. 3) Work around this bug, by explicitly invoking the trigger in postinst at which time the conffile is guaranteed to be present. This kind of defeats the purpose of triggers. 4) Your solution? Helmut [1] http://packages.debian.org/changelogs/pool/main/d/desktop-base/current/changelog#version7.0.0_exp1 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20121008111307.ga6...@alf.mars
Bug#683847: unblock: sgml-base/1.26+nmu4
On Sun, Oct 7, 2012 at 22:20:54 +0200, Helmut Grohne wrote: > In addition a number of people on #-mentors suggested that a > Pre-Dependency on dpkg shouldn't be too bad since dpkg should be > upgraded early in any case. Sounds like a myth to me. Reference? Cheers, Julien signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Bug#683847: unblock: sgml-base/1.26+nmu4
On Wed, Oct 03, 2012 at 06:23:17PM +0200, Julien Cristau wrote: > Can you provide a pointer to the dpkg pre-dependency discussion? To comply with the Debian policy I asked[33] about the pre-dependency on debian-devel@l.d.o and Ian Jackson suggested[38] that this should be fixed in dpkg instead. I therefore pulled[43] in debian-dpkg@l.d.o as the maintainer address for dpkg. I never saw an answer nor any follow up question from a dpkg maintainer. Given that dpkg is highly critical infrastructure and the freeze I concluded that the dpkg maintainers would not be able to implement the necessary changes in a timely manner. In addition a number of people on #-mentors suggested that a Pre-Dependency on dpkg shouldn't be too bad since dpkg should be upgraded early in any case. The desktop-base package was given as an example for adding that pre-dependency without discussion. Helmut [33] http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=678902#33 [38] http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=678902#38 [43] http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=678902#43 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20121007202053.ga4...@alf.mars
Bug#683847: unblock: sgml-base/1.26+nmu4
On Sat, Aug 4, 2012 at 20:46:41 +0200, Helmut Grohne wrote: > Package: release.debian.org > Severity: normal > User: release.debian@packages.debian.org > Usertags: unblock > Control: block -1 by 683844 > > Dear release team, > > Please > > unblock sgml-base/1.26+nmu4 > > The version intends to fix all remaining RC bugs of sgml-base: > > #678902: sgml-base needs to Pre-Depend on dpkg 1.16.4 > #676717: sgml-base produces broken super catalog when packages are in > "rc" state > > The patch is the same as attached to the respective bug logs. The > pre-dependency has been discussed with -devel and deemed appropriate, > because the dpkg maintainers will not be able to provide the necessary > dpkg feature (since they failed to reply in a timely manner). The > intrusive part of parsing catalogs has been contributed and reviewed by > Jakub Wilk. The patch also removes some useless and annoying messages as > requested by Julien Cristau. > > The attached .debdiff is between wheezy and the not yet sponsored sid > version. The sponsorship bug #683844 blocks this bug. > Can you provide a pointer to the dpkg pre-dependency discussion? Cheers, Julien signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Bug#683847: unblock: sgml-base/1.26+nmu4
Package: release.debian.org Severity: normal User: release.debian@packages.debian.org Usertags: unblock Control: block -1 by 683844 Dear release team, Please unblock sgml-base/1.26+nmu4 The version intends to fix all remaining RC bugs of sgml-base: #678902: sgml-base needs to Pre-Depend on dpkg 1.16.4 #676717: sgml-base produces broken super catalog when packages are in "rc" state The patch is the same as attached to the respective bug logs. The pre-dependency has been discussed with -devel and deemed appropriate, because the dpkg maintainers will not be able to provide the necessary dpkg feature (since they failed to reply in a timely manner). The intrusive part of parsing catalogs has been contributed and reviewed by Jakub Wilk. The patch also removes some useless and annoying messages as requested by Julien Cristau. The attached .debdiff is between wheezy and the not yet sponsored sid version. The sponsorship bug #683844 blocks this bug. Helmut diff -Nru sgml-base-1.26+nmu3/debian/changelog sgml-base-1.26+nmu4/debian/changelog --- sgml-base-1.26+nmu3/debian/changelog2012-05-28 21:11:52.0 +0200 +++ sgml-base-1.26+nmu4/debian/changelog2012-06-27 21:04:29.0 +0200 @@ -1,3 +1,16 @@ +sgml-base (1.26+nmu4) unstable; urgency=low + + * Non-maintainer upload. + * update-catalog --update-super ignores catalogs referencing non-existent +files. (Closes: #676717) Thanks to Jakub Wilk for contributing the parser. + * Remove warning about rebuilding packages as it may confuse users. + * Quieten update-catalog during trigger and postinst, to avoid warnings for +packages in "rc" state. + * Pre-Depend on dpkg >= 1.16.4 (Closes: #678902). Removed dependency on +dpkg >= 1.14.18. sgml-base highlights a bug in dpkg's trigger processing. + + -- Helmut Grohne Thu, 21 Jun 2012 16:09:07 +0200 + sgml-base (1.26+nmu3) unstable; urgency=low * Non-maintainer upload. diff -Nru sgml-base-1.26+nmu3/debian/control sgml-base-1.26+nmu4/debian/control --- sgml-base-1.26+nmu3/debian/control 2012-05-28 13:58:23.0 +0200 +++ sgml-base-1.26+nmu4/debian/control 2012-06-27 20:38:49.0 +0200 @@ -11,7 +11,8 @@ Priority: optional Architecture: all Conflicts: sgml-data (<= 0.02), sgmltools-2 (<= 2.0.2-4) -Depends: ${perl:Depends}, dpkg (>= 1.14.18) +Depends: ${perl:Depends} +Pre-Depends: dpkg (>= 1.16.4) Suggests: sgml-base-doc Description: SGML infrastructure and SGML catalog file support This package creates the SGML infrastructure directories and provides diff -Nru sgml-base-1.26+nmu3/debian/sgml-base.postinst sgml-base-1.26+nmu4/debian/sgml-base.postinst --- sgml-base-1.26+nmu3/debian/sgml-base.postinst 2012-05-28 13:58:23.0 +0200 +++ sgml-base-1.26+nmu4/debian/sgml-base.postinst 2012-06-22 17:22:31.0 +0200 @@ -61,12 +61,12 @@ fi ## -- -update-catalog --update-super +update-catalog --quiet --update-super ln -sf /var/lib/sgml-base/supercatalog /etc/sgml/catalog fi if [ "$1" = "triggered" ] then -update-catalog --update-super +update-catalog --quiet --update-super fi ## -- diff -Nru sgml-base-1.26+nmu3/tools/update-catalog sgml-base-1.26+nmu4/tools/update-catalog --- sgml-base-1.26+nmu3/tools/update-catalog2012-05-28 21:11:52.0 +0200 +++ sgml-base-1.26+nmu4/tools/update-catalog2012-06-27 21:04:45.0 +0200 @@ -4,6 +4,7 @@ ## -- ## Copyright (c) 2001-2004 Ardo van Rangelrooij ## Copyright (c) 2012 Helmut Grohne +## Copyright (c) 2012 Jakub Wilk ## ## This is free software; see the GNU General Public Licence version 2 ## or later for copying conditions. There is NO warranty. @@ -138,8 +139,6 @@ print "Invocation of dpkg-trigger failed with status $?.\n"; print "Forcing update of the super catalog...\n"; &update_super; -} else { -print "update-catalog: Please rebuild the package being set up with a version of debhelper fixing #477751.\n"; } } elsif ( $add ) @@ -240,17 +239,71 @@ } ## -- +# Reference: https://www.oasis-open.org/specs/a401.htm +sub check_catalog($) +{ +my($catalog)=shift; +my $base = $catalog; +$base =~ s,/[^/]+$,,; +my $catalog_tokens = qr{ +( (?: \s+ | -- .*? --)+ # whitespace and comments +| ' .*? ' | " .*? " # literal +| \S+ # other tokens +) +}sx; +unless(open(PKGCAT, "<", $catalog)) { +print "Warning: Ignoring unreadable catalog file `$catalog'.\n" +unless $quiet; +return 0; +}; +local $/; +my $contents = ; +close PKGCAT; +my $prevtoken = 0; +while ($contents =~ m/$catalog_tokens/g) { +my $t