Hi all. Axel Beckert <abe@debian.org> (01/11/2011): > Dinesh Pannu wrote on 13th of October 2011: > > The recent updates to pacemaker in backports have been causing me > > some grief. Having trouble installing ocfs2-tools-pacemaker which > > has a dependency conflict with pacemaker. pacemaker depends on > > libstonithd1 while ocfs2-tools-pacemaker depends on > > libstonithd0. libstonithd1 conflicts with libstonithd0. > > We ran into this issue, today, too. Looks like a trivial problem to solve. Why are those libs in conflict exactly? The whole point of changing package names is that you can keep the old lib around until all packages are updated to use the new lib. Based on the contents of those files, I see no reasons why they would conflict. Except /u/s/d/$package, we have: libstonithd0_1.0.11-1~bpo60+1_amd64.deb: /usr/lib/libstonithd.so.0.0.0 /usr/lib/libstonithd.so.0 -> libstonithd.so.0.0.0 libstonithd1_1.1.5-3~bpo60+1_amd64.deb: /usr/lib/libstonithd.so.1.0.0 /usr/lib/libstonithd.so.1 -> libstonithd.so.1.0.0 Looks like a broken fix there: | pacemaker (1.1.5-3) unstable; urgency=low | | * debian/control: Really fix the issue with conflicting files this time, | esp. for libstonithd1-dev vs. libstonithd0-dev (Closes: #639272) | | -- Martin Loschwitz <madkiss@debian.org> Fri, 26 Aug 2011 13:09:40 +0000 Mraw, KiBi.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature