[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Bug#1035310: bullseye-pu: package xz-utils/5.2.11-0~deb11u1



Hello Sebastian,
On Sun, Apr 30, 2023 at 10:17:07PM +0200, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote:
> On 2023-04-30 18:43:18 [+0200], Helge Kreutzmann wrote:
> > > - the backport package of manpages-de and manpages-fr provides a
> > >   man page for xz. These files conflict with the one provided by
> > >   xz-utils package. The bpo package and xz-utils in Bookworm have proper
> > >   Breaks: and Replaces: relation to allow smooth upgrades.
> > >   This update of xz does not provide such a relation since the current
> > >   version of manpages-{de|fr} in Bullseye does not provide this
> > >   man page. As per testing, the Breaks: in manpages-{de|fr} forbids
> > >   installing of this xz-utils. My understanding is that once these
> > >   man pages are visible in Bullseye via xz-utils, the bpo packages of
> > >   manpages-l10n stops creating them as part of the build process. They
> > >   are not present in testing/ Bookworm version of the package.
> > 
> > No, we need to coordinate about this. You previously considered doing
> > a backport and I asked you several if this is still the case; since
> > you did not respond, I did not remove the conflicting pages in my
> > bullseye packport. 
> 
> I added you to Cc: for reason of coordination. I always intended to do
> -pu instead of a bpo. I intended to respond earlier but didn't manage to
> do it until now. Sorry for that.

Thanks for adding me and we are all overloaded some times. 

> > As bookworm is about to release, I just wonder if that is really
> > necessary to introduce the translation files in your backport. I'm all
> > about translations, but this is a bit fragile with two backports with
> > all the upgrade paths. So hopefully we get this right.
> 
> Stable Bullseye, no bpo.

I don't know if this ease the situation regarding the required package
relationship.

From my side this is just a few lines in my rules file and the
appropriate package relationships, the latter are the tricky part to
get right.

> > If you still feel this is necessary for your users, then please
> > contact me and I can perform another upload with the file removed and
> > appropriate package relationships. (This implies you tell me the
> > version which introduces the files.)
> 
> I'm waiting for the stable team to confirm or deny my request. Once that
> is clear we can see how to move forward.

Ok.

> > Please tell me as well which translated man pages you ship, as there
> > are also Danish and Ukrainian ones in my backports.
> > 
> > Please not that I will not perform uploads to bullseye once bookworm
> > has been released.
> 
> Only DE and FR made it into the 5.2 series.

So we need to deal with those two "only".

Thus I'm waiting for further information from your side. 

Greetings

          Helge

-- 
      Dr. Helge Kreutzmann                     debian@helgefjell.de
           Dipl.-Phys.                   http://www.helgefjell.de/debian.php
        64bit GNU powered                     gpg signed mail preferred
           Help keep free software "libre": http://www.ffii.de/

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: