Re: Strange package priorities
On 05-Feb-18 01:56, Chaskiel M Grundman wrote:
> For some reason, the package priorities in
> <http://debian-amd64.alioth.debian.org/debian-pure64>'s sarge don't match
> i386 sarge. A few of these are clearly broken or violate policy:
>
> netkit-ping has priority standard instead of priority extra (netkit-ping
> conflicts with iputils-ping which has priority important)
> libsasl-gssapi-heimdal has priority standard instead of priority optional
> (it depends on heimdal library packages which have priority optional)
> libgcrypt11 has priority optional instead of priority standard (libgnutls11
> (standard) depends on it)
> liblzo1 has priority optional instead of priority standard
> (libgnutls7/libgnutls11 (standard) depend on it)
> libbz2-1.0 has priority optional instead of priority standard
> (gnupg/python2.3 (standard) depend on it)
>
> lesser breakage:
> libssl0.9.6 (standard instead of extra) seems entirely useless. There
> shouldn't be amd64 packages that can possibly depend on it.
>
> The full set of changes is summarized below (+ means only in amd64, - means
> only in i386):
> (I'm not implying that all the changes are problematic, only that I don't
> know how they came about or how priorities are supposed to be synchronized
> across architectures (I _thought_ they were defined in the source package
> and thus didn't require synchronization))
The official Debian archive uses an 'Overrides' file that may change the
priority which is specified in the source package.
As far as I know, the amd64 archives on alioth do not use the
'Overrides' file and therefore use the unchanged priorities from the
source packages.
Anyway, I think that bug reports should be filed to the BTS
for packages which specify wrong priorities in the sources.
Regards
Andreas Jochens
Reply to: