Re: please build XFree86 4.3.0 for experimental
On Sun, Nov 02, 2003 at 09:39:23PM -0500, Adam C Powell IV wrote:
Okay, finally finished building this morning (various difficulties), and
installed successfully; just uploaded. Sorry about the delay.
And good news, it even seems to work! But I haven't pushed it yet...
Thanks!
The new problem with 4.3.0 is the versioned dependency of xlibs on
xlibs-data. So there is a problem if new tetex or xcursor source is
uploaded between the upload of xlibs-data and xlibs.
...because the arch-independent packages are available from the archive
for your architecture before that architecture has built the
corresponding arch-specific packages, right?
If, say, MIPS is slow to build xfree86, then tetex/xcursor will be
impossible to autobuild in the meantime, because xlibs-dev will be
impossible to install. And then, if a new X is uploaded before this
is resolved, neither one can be built because neither is installable.
I see.
Even worse, autobuilding X becomes totally impossible once xlibs-data is
accepted, because to build it, one must install libxcursor-dev, which
requires installing xlibs, which is not installable because it is old
and xlibs-data is new. So one must have previously installed either
xlibs 4.2.x or else *both* the old xlibs *and* old xlibs-data, then one
can install libxcursor-dev, then one can build the new X. Or one could
have previously installed libxcursor-dev and tetex-bin (which is why I
didn't notice this wrt tetex), but the autobuilders of course have none
of these.
I see.
There are two ways to resolve this: break the dependency of libxcursor1
on xlibs (or change it to Recommends or Suggests), or soften the
version requirement of the dependency relationship between xlibs and
xlibs-data (e.g. = 4.3.0 or even =${Source-Version} will solve
this problem, though it may break in other subtle ways).
No, I think the right thing to do is soften the versioned dep on
xlibs-data. In fact, the versioning can go away entirely since it did
not exist before 4.3.0. Should the data ever change in a way that
matters for compatibility, versioning can be added.
I'm not sure if it was Daniel Stone or me who decided to make xlibs-data
and xlibs upgrade in precise lockstep, but it is starting to look like a
mistake.
Thanks for the patient explanation. You were describing a situation I
was familiar with (I don't have an i386, so on my sparc and powerpc
boxen I often see locales and glibc-doc update one day, and the rest
glibc the next). I hadn't previously thought about what this can do to
-dev packages and autobuilders before.
--
G. Branden Robinson| Human beings rarely imagine a god
Debian GNU/Linux | that behaves any better than a
[EMAIL PROTECTED] | spoiled child.
http://people.debian.org/~branden/ | -- Robert Heinlein
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
Re: please build XFree86 4.3.0 for experimental
On Fri, 2003-10-31 at 16:15, Branden Robinson wrote:
On Fri, Oct 31, 2003 at 07:54:08AM -0500, Adam C Powell IV wrote:
Is anyone building -0pre1v4? If not I've got a build going and can
upload when it's done. (Tried to install -0pre1v3 last night, but
xlibs-data is only -0pre1v4.)
I would very much like to see an ARM upload of -0pre1v4.
Okay, finally finished building this morning (various difficulties), and
installed successfully; just uploaded. Sorry about the delay.
And good news, it even seems to work! But I haven't pushed it yet...
Also, I noticed two problem along the way. First, there seems to be a
circular dependency here. xfree86 needs libxcursor-dev to build. But
libxcursor1 depends on xlibs. So one needs xlibs-dev 4.2.x installed in
order to build xcursor, though when xfree86 4.3.0 goes into unstable,
there will be no xlibs-dev 4.2.x. Long-term, any release of xcursor
while xfree86 is building (and thus is uninstallable on some arches)
breaks stuff, so IMO this is a serious bug.
Unless I'm misunderstaning you, this is no different from the
build-dependency loop between tetex-base and xfree86.
(TeTeX depends on Xlib for xdvi, and XFree86 depends on TeTeX to
generate docs.)
You're right, I hadn't thought of that.
The new problem with 4.3.0 is the versioned dependency of xlibs on
xlibs-data. So there is a problem if new tetex or xcursor source is
uploaded between the upload of xlibs-data and xlibs. If, say, MIPS is
slow to build xfree86, then tetex/xcursor will be impossible to
autobuild in the meantime, because xlibs-dev will be impossible to
install. And then, if a new X is uploaded before this is resolved,
neither one can be built because neither is installable.
Even worse, autobuilding X becomes totally impossible once xlibs-data is
accepted, because to build it, one must install libxcursor-dev, which
requires installing xlibs, which is not installable because it is old
and xlibs-data is new. So one must have previously installed either
xlibs 4.2.x or else *both* the old xlibs *and* old xlibs-data, then one
can install libxcursor-dev, then one can build the new X. Or one could
have previously installed libxcursor-dev and tetex-bin (which is why I
didn't notice this wrt tetex), but the autobuilders of course have none
of these.
There are two ways to resolve this: break the dependency of libxcursor1
on xlibs (or change it to Recommends or Suggests), or soften the
version requirement of the dependency relationship between xlibs and
xlibs-data (e.g. = 4.3.0 or even =${Source-Version} will solve
this problem, though it may break in other subtle ways).
I broke the circular dep manually by forcing libxcursor1 to install
though xlibs was not configured (wouldn't configure without xlibs-data
at the same version). But the only sane long-term workaround I can
think of is to remove the dependency between libxcursor1 and xlibs, and
just let applications depend on both shlib packages.
I don't understand.
See above.
Second, xlibs-data asks manually if I want to accept new versions of
*all* of its config files the first time it's installed. I'm not sure
about what can be done about this, since those files seem to be moving
from one package to another, but it's a bit annoying...
xfree86 (4.3.0-0pre1v5) experimental; urgency=low
[...]
* Update xlibs and xlibs-data's package descriptions to clarify that X
Keyboard Extension (XKB) data is in xlibs, but other
architecture-independent data is in xlibs-data. The XKB data has not
moved because dpkg supports no mechanism for migrating conffiles between
packages, and it is unacceptable for people to be spuriously shown dpkg's
changed-conffile prompt dozens of times when upgrading from versions of
xlibs prior to 4.3.0.
- debian/control
-0pre1v5 isn't released yet, but the above change has already been made.
Thank you, this helps a lot! It would be much better of course if dpkg
could migrate conffiles, but that sounds like a lot of work...
Now ARM folk, any chance of some help with 212569? (my Tuesday post
about Mozilla regxpcom/regchrome and C++ on our beloved platform...)
Zeen,
--
-Adam P.
GPG fingerprint: D54D 1AEE B11C CE9B A02B C5DD 526F 01E8 564E E4B6
Welcome to the best software in the world today cafe!
http://lyre.mit.edu/~powell/The_Best_Stuff_In_The_World_Today_Cafe.ogg
Re: please build XFree86 4.3.0 for experimental
Hello, Is anyone building -0pre1v4? If not I've got a build going and can upload when it's done. (Tried to install -0pre1v3 last night, but xlibs-data is only -0pre1v4.) Also, I noticed two problem along the way. First, there seems to be a circular dependency here. xfree86 needs libxcursor-dev to build. But libxcursor1 depends on xlibs. So one needs xlibs-dev 4.2.x installed in order to build xcursor, though when xfree86 4.3.0 goes into unstable, there will be no xlibs-dev 4.2.x. Long-term, any release of xcursor while xfree86 is building (and thus is uninstallable on some arches) breaks stuff, so IMO this is a serious bug. I broke the circular dep manually by forcing libxcursor1 to install though xlibs was not configured (wouldn't configure without xlibs-data at the same version). But the only sane long-term workaround I can think of is to remove the dependency between libxcursor1 and xlibs, and just let applications depend on both shlib packages. Second, xlibs-data asks manually if I want to accept new versions of *all* of its config files the first time it's installed. I'm not sure about what can be done about this, since those files seem to be moving from one package to another, but it's a bit annoying... Apologies if these have already been discussed (or solved?) on debian-x; please CC me on posts to that list (though I'm on debian-arm, so if you reply to both lists I'm all set). On Wed, 2003-10-08 at 04:31, Philip Blundell wrote: On Tue, 2003-10-07 at 23:27, Branden Robinson wrote: Please, please, build xfree86 4.3.0-0pre1v3 from experimental for your architecture. Othmar, I thought you built and uploaded this several days ago. What's up? -- -Adam P. GPG fingerprint: D54D 1AEE B11C CE9B A02B C5DD 526F 01E8 564E E4B6 Welcome to the best software in the world today cafe! http://lyre.mit.edu/~powell/The_Best_Stuff_In_The_World_Today_Cafe.ogg -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: please build XFree86 4.3.0 for experimental
On Fri, Oct 31, 2003 at 07:54:08AM -0500, Adam C Powell IV wrote: Is anyone building -0pre1v4? If not I've got a build going and can upload when it's done. (Tried to install -0pre1v3 last night, but xlibs-data is only -0pre1v4.) I would very much like to see an ARM upload of -0pre1v4. Also, I noticed two problem along the way. First, there seems to be a circular dependency here. xfree86 needs libxcursor-dev to build. But libxcursor1 depends on xlibs. So one needs xlibs-dev 4.2.x installed in order to build xcursor, though when xfree86 4.3.0 goes into unstable, there will be no xlibs-dev 4.2.x. Long-term, any release of xcursor while xfree86 is building (and thus is uninstallable on some arches) breaks stuff, so IMO this is a serious bug. Unless I'm misunderstaning you, this is no different from the build-dependency loop between tetex-base and xfree86. (TeTeX depends on Xlib for xdvi, and XFree86 depends on TeTeX to generate docs.) I broke the circular dep manually by forcing libxcursor1 to install though xlibs was not configured (wouldn't configure without xlibs-data at the same version). But the only sane long-term workaround I can think of is to remove the dependency between libxcursor1 and xlibs, and just let applications depend on both shlib packages. I don't understand. Second, xlibs-data asks manually if I want to accept new versions of *all* of its config files the first time it's installed. I'm not sure about what can be done about this, since those files seem to be moving from one package to another, but it's a bit annoying... xfree86 (4.3.0-0pre1v5) experimental; urgency=low [...] * Update xlibs and xlibs-data's package descriptions to clarify that X Keyboard Extension (XKB) data is in xlibs, but other architecture-independent data is in xlibs-data. The XKB data has not moved because dpkg supports no mechanism for migrating conffiles between packages, and it is unacceptable for people to be spuriously shown dpkg's changed-conffile prompt dozens of times when upgrading from versions of xlibs prior to 4.3.0. - debian/control -0pre1v5 isn't released yet, but the above change has already been made. -- G. Branden Robinson| Debian GNU/Linux | Music is the brandy of the damned. [EMAIL PROTECTED] | -- George Bernard Shaw http://people.debian.org/~branden/ | signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: please build XFree86 4.3.0 for experimental
On Fri, Oct 10, 2003 at 02:17:57PM +1000, Daniel Stone wrote: On Wed, Oct 08, 2003 at 12:58:56PM +0200, Michel D?nzer wrote: On Wed, 2003-10-08 at 03:50, Daniel Stone wrote: On Tue, Oct 07, 2003 at 05:27:05PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote: [...] * s390 has never tried to build XFree86 4.3.0 as far as I can tell. Bastian Blank attempted several times, got tripped up by the DRI foolery [...] What's 'the DRI foolery'? Um, xlibmesa-drm-src getting built with NOT_USING_XF86_SERVER, or something. Maybe Xcursor, I don't really remember. After the s390-specific commits I made today, Bastian seems to have had a successful build of a (modified) 4.3.0-0pre1v3. -- G. Branden Robinson| Men are born ignorant, not stupid. Debian GNU/Linux | They are made stupid by education. [EMAIL PROTECTED] | -- Bertrand Russell http://people.debian.org/~branden/ | signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: please build XFree86 4.3.0 for experimental
On Fri, Oct 10, 2003 at 03:19:42AM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote: After the s390-specific commits I made today, Bastian seems to have had a successful build of a (modified) 4.3.0-0pre1v3. no, it failes on usr/X11R6/lib/X11/doc/README.dps (xfree86-common) bastian -- The heart is not a logical organ. -- Dr. Janet Wallace, The Deadly Years, stardate 3479.4 signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: please build XFree86 4.3.0 for experimental
On Wed, Oct 08, 2003 at 12:58:56PM +0200, Michel D?nzer wrote: On Wed, 2003-10-08 at 03:50, Daniel Stone wrote: On Tue, Oct 07, 2003 at 05:27:05PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote: [...] * s390 has never tried to build XFree86 4.3.0 as far as I can tell. Bastian Blank attempted several times, got tripped up by the DRI foolery [...] What's 'the DRI foolery'? Um, xlibmesa-drm-src getting built with NOT_USING_XF86_SERVER, or something. Maybe Xcursor, I don't really remember. -- Daniel Stone [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.debian.org - http://www.kde.org - http://www.freedesktop.org What's next? People turning up on my doorstep, observing that the lack of doorbell is likely to confuse people and hence removing my front door? -- David Woodhouse on usability efforts, Advogato pgpn996OEdCQn.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: please build XFree86 4.3.0 for experimental
On Fri, Oct 10, 2003 at 02:17:57PM +1000, Daniel Stone wrote: On Wed, Oct 08, 2003 at 12:58:56PM +0200, Michel D?nzer wrote: On Wed, 2003-10-08 at 03:50, Daniel Stone wrote: On Tue, Oct 07, 2003 at 05:27:05PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote: [...] * s390 has never tried to build XFree86 4.3.0 as far as I can tell. Bastian Blank attempted several times, got tripped up by the DRI foolery [...] What's 'the DRI foolery'? Um, xlibmesa-drm-src getting built with NOT_USING_XF86_SERVER, or something. Maybe Xcursor, I don't really remember. After the s390-specific commits I made today, Bastian seems to have had a successful build of a (modified) 4.3.0-0pre1v3. -- G. Branden Robinson| Men are born ignorant, not stupid. Debian GNU/Linux | They are made stupid by education. [EMAIL PROTECTED] | -- Bertrand Russell http://people.debian.org/~branden/ | signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: please build XFree86 4.3.0 for experimental
On Fri, Oct 10, 2003 at 03:19:42AM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote: After the s390-specific commits I made today, Bastian seems to have had a successful build of a (modified) 4.3.0-0pre1v3. no, it failes on usr/X11R6/lib/X11/doc/README.dps (xfree86-common) bastian -- The heart is not a logical organ. -- Dr. Janet Wallace, The Deadly Years, stardate 3479.4 signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: please build XFree86 4.3.0 for experimental
On Wed, Oct 08, 2003 at 12:58:56PM +0200, Michel D?nzer wrote: On Wed, 2003-10-08 at 03:50, Daniel Stone wrote: On Tue, Oct 07, 2003 at 05:27:05PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote: [...] * s390 has never tried to build XFree86 4.3.0 as far as I can tell. Bastian Blank attempted several times, got tripped up by the DRI foolery [...] What's 'the DRI foolery'? Um, xlibmesa-drm-src getting built with NOT_USING_XF86_SERVER, or something. Maybe Xcursor, I don't really remember. -- Daniel Stone [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.debian.org - http://www.kde.org - http://www.freedesktop.org What's next? People turning up on my doorstep, observing that the lack of doorbell is likely to confuse people and hence removing my front door? -- David Woodhouse on usability efforts, Advogato pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: please build XFree86 4.3.0 for experimental
On Wed, 2003-10-08 at 03:50, Daniel Stone wrote: On Tue, Oct 07, 2003 at 05:27:05PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote: [...] * s390 has never tried to build XFree86 4.3.0 as far as I can tell. Bastian Blank attempted several times, got tripped up by the DRI foolery [...] What's 'the DRI foolery'? -- Earthling Michel Dnzer \ Debian (powerpc), XFree86 and DRI developer Software libre enthusiast \ http://svcs.affero.net/rm.php?r=daenzer -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: please build XFree86 4.3.0 for experimental
On Wed, Oct 08, 2003 at 11:50:43AM +1000, Daniel Stone wrote: * s390 has never tried to build XFree86 4.3.0 as far as I can tell. Bastian Blank attempted several times, got tripped up by the DRI foolery and other NOT_BUILDING_XF86_SERVER fun, and ended up giving up. After getting enough free space on raptor, i try to build it another time. Bastian -- It is a human characteristic to love little animals, especially if they're attractive in some way. -- McCoy, The Trouble with Tribbles, stardate 4525.6 signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: please build XFree86 4.3.0 for experimental
[I am not subscribed to debian-s390.] On Wed, Oct 08, 2003 at 07:16:30PM +0200, Bastian Blank wrote: On Wed, Oct 08, 2003 at 11:50:43AM +1000, Daniel Stone wrote: * s390 has never tried to build XFree86 4.3.0 as far as I can tell. Bastian Blank attempted several times, got tripped up by the DRI foolery and other NOT_BUILDING_XF86_SERVER fun, and ended up giving up. After getting enough free space on raptor, i try to build it another time. If the build process complains about changes to the MANIFEST.s390, just mail the debian-x list MANIFEST.s390.new. We'll sort it out. -- G. Branden Robinson|If you make people think they're Debian GNU/Linux |thinking, they'll love you; but if [EMAIL PROTECTED] |you really make them think, they'll http://people.debian.org/~branden/ |hate you.-- Don Marquis signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: please build XFree86 4.3.0 for experimental
On Wed, 2003-10-08 at 03:50, Daniel Stone wrote: On Tue, Oct 07, 2003 at 05:27:05PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote: [...] * s390 has never tried to build XFree86 4.3.0 as far as I can tell. Bastian Blank attempted several times, got tripped up by the DRI foolery [...] What's 'the DRI foolery'? -- Earthling Michel Dänzer \ Debian (powerpc), XFree86 and DRI developer Software libre enthusiast \ http://svcs.affero.net/rm.php?r=daenzer
Re: please build XFree86 4.3.0 for experimental
On Wed, Oct 08, 2003 at 11:50:43AM +1000, Daniel Stone wrote: * s390 has never tried to build XFree86 4.3.0 as far as I can tell. Bastian Blank attempted several times, got tripped up by the DRI foolery and other NOT_BUILDING_XF86_SERVER fun, and ended up giving up. After getting enough free space on raptor, i try to build it another time. Bastian -- It is a human characteristic to love little animals, especially if they're attractive in some way. -- McCoy, The Trouble with Tribbles, stardate 4525.6 signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: please build XFree86 4.3.0 for experimental
[I am not subscribed to debian-s390.] On Wed, Oct 08, 2003 at 07:16:30PM +0200, Bastian Blank wrote: On Wed, Oct 08, 2003 at 11:50:43AM +1000, Daniel Stone wrote: * s390 has never tried to build XFree86 4.3.0 as far as I can tell. Bastian Blank attempted several times, got tripped up by the DRI foolery and other NOT_BUILDING_XF86_SERVER fun, and ended up giving up. After getting enough free space on raptor, i try to build it another time. If the build process complains about changes to the MANIFEST.s390, just mail the debian-x list MANIFEST.s390.new. We'll sort it out. -- G. Branden Robinson|If you make people think they're Debian GNU/Linux |thinking, they'll love you; but if [EMAIL PROTECTED] |you really make them think, they'll http://people.debian.org/~branden/ |hate you.-- Don Marquis signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: please build XFree86 4.3.0 for experimental
On Tue, Oct 07, 2003 at 05:27:05PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote: * mips successfully built 4.3.0-0pre1v1 but hasn't attempted 4.3.0-0pre1v3. * arm was holding off for a PCI handling fix that affectec RiscPC machines; this fix is in 4.3.0-0pre1v3; please try to build it. * mipsel has never tried to build XFree86 4.3.0 as far as I can tell. * s390 has never tried to build XFree86 4.3.0 as far as I can tell. Not that it's crucial to the general archive, but: * netbsd-i386 has never tried to build XFree86 4.3.0 (unless someone else did it and never spoke up). This is due to a large set of things that, with any luck, will start to be resolved in the relatively near future (moving a build box into a colo where it can get sufficient bandwidth, having debpool available in a public enough fashion that I'm willing to use it for managing things, and the new job that will provide funds for #1 and caused delays in #2 slowing down enough to permit more Debian work again). And then I get to figure out how to make subversion do the Right Thing, which is something I should probably be figuring out anyway. :) -- Joel Baker [EMAIL PROTECTED],''`. Debian GNU NetBSD/i386 porter: :' : `. `' `- pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: please build XFree86 4.3.0 for experimental
On Tue, Oct 07, 2003 at 05:27:05PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote: Four architectures are lagging the version of xfree86 in experimental, and three of them have never attempted to build xfree86 4.3.0 at all, at least according to madison. Please, please, build xfree86 4.3.0-0pre1v3 from experimental for your architecture. [...] * s390 has never tried to build XFree86 4.3.0 as far as I can tell. Bastian Blank attempted several times, got tripped up by the DRI foolery and other NOT_BUILDING_XF86_SERVER fun, and ended up giving up. -- Daniel Stone [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.debian.org - http://www.kde.org - http://www.freedesktop.org What's next? People turning up on my doorstep, observing that the lack of doorbell is likely to confuse people and hence removing my front door? -- David Woodhouse on usability efforts, Advogato pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: please build XFree86 4.3.0 for experimental
On Tue, Oct 07, 2003 at 05:27:05PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote: * mips successfully built 4.3.0-0pre1v1 but hasn't attempted 4.3.0-0pre1v3. * arm was holding off for a PCI handling fix that affectec RiscPC machines; this fix is in 4.3.0-0pre1v3; please try to build it. * mipsel has never tried to build XFree86 4.3.0 as far as I can tell. * s390 has never tried to build XFree86 4.3.0 as far as I can tell. Not that it's crucial to the general archive, but: * netbsd-i386 has never tried to build XFree86 4.3.0 (unless someone else did it and never spoke up). This is due to a large set of things that, with any luck, will start to be resolved in the relatively near future (moving a build box into a colo where it can get sufficient bandwidth, having debpool available in a public enough fashion that I'm willing to use it for managing things, and the new job that will provide funds for #1 and caused delays in #2 slowing down enough to permit more Debian work again). And then I get to figure out how to make subversion do the Right Thing, which is something I should probably be figuring out anyway. :) -- Joel Baker [EMAIL PROTECTED],''`. Debian GNU NetBSD/i386 porter: :' : `. `' `- pgpImo9Ots0om.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: please build XFree86 4.3.0 for experimental
On Tue, Oct 07, 2003 at 05:27:05PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote: Four architectures are lagging the version of xfree86 in experimental, and three of them have never attempted to build xfree86 4.3.0 at all, at least according to madison. Please, please, build xfree86 4.3.0-0pre1v3 from experimental for your architecture. [...] * s390 has never tried to build XFree86 4.3.0 as far as I can tell. Bastian Blank attempted several times, got tripped up by the DRI foolery and other NOT_BUILDING_XF86_SERVER fun, and ended up giving up. -- Daniel Stone [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.debian.org - http://www.kde.org - http://www.freedesktop.org What's next? People turning up on my doorstep, observing that the lack of doorbell is likely to confuse people and hence removing my front door? -- David Woodhouse on usability efforts, Advogato pgpu1UmmSIGTd.pgp Description: PGP signature
