On Sat, Jun 19, 2004 at 12:34:03AM +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote: > On Fri, Jun 18, 2004 at 11:52:36PM +0200, Dominique Devriese wrote: > > Adrian Bunk writes: > > > > > On Fri, Jun 18, 2004 at 10:29:07PM +0200, Dominique Devriese wrote: > > >> ... Clearly, the highest severity that this bug can arguably > > >> qualify for is "serious" if and only if Chris Cheney thinks so, and > > >> important otherwise. Chris has clearly shown that he did not at > > >> the time think so, so I am downgrading this bug to important. It's > > >> up to him to change it to serious if he thinks it deserves that. I > > >> hope we can now stop playing pingpong with the severity ? > > > > > As said in the part of the mail you skipped: Your RM reopened a > > > similar (grave) bug I sent that covered a similar issue. > > > > > Chris uploaded a new version of kdelibs 6 days after my bug report. > > > > > Why did he downgrade it instead of simply fixing the issue via a > > > conflict? > > > > Probably because > > 1 adding a conflict to a package because of a bug in another package > > is generally the wrong thing to do, even if it may be good as a > > workaround in this case > > To quote another mail I sent to you in this thread: > > > <-- snip --> > > Please read the statement of your RM regarding a similar issue in > #170385 (in this case it was even clear that the bug was not in the > library). > > <-- snip --> > > > Is it really "the wrong thing to do" if your RM thinks a conflict is > required in such cases? I am really fatigued (I think I may not have ever gotten well yet) so I don't really want to start a flamewar. Here is a more full quote and more fully explains the situation. The situation with apollon is not the same as the wine issue. The wine issue was that old already in Debian stable versions of wine would break with new libc6. apollon if it exists in Debian stable already (I didn't check) would not work anyway since it would be compiled against KDE 2.2. I'll let domi and you hash this out the rest of the way, I need to lay back down. Thanks, Chris Cheney http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=170385 "libc6 should conflict with wine (<< 0.0.20021007-1) because earlier wine packages don't work with glibc 2.3 (see #165323). Technically the usage of __libc_fork was a bug in Wine. Without a conflict in libc6 many people doing a partial upgrade from Debian 3.0 to Debian 3.1 will have a new libc6 together with an old version of wine installed which will result in a non-working Wine. A conflict in libc6 is the only possible solution to avoid this."
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature