Re: Bug#324445: Lingering Priority: important libopencdk4 package on AMD64 breaks installation
Hi everybody.
Martin Michlmayr <tbm@cyrius.com> writes:
> Can someone from the AMD64 port please comment on and deal with this
> bug report:
>
> * Miciah Dashiel Butler Masters <miciah@myrealbox.com> [2005-08-22 01:19]:
>> Package: libopencdk4
>> Version: 1:0.4.2-4
>> Severity: grave
>> Justification: Breaks installation
>>
>> When I was trying to install SID with a recent installer nightly (which
>> I assume doesn't diminish the relevance of this particular report),
>> the installation would fail on account of this package. Because
>> the priority of the package is 'important', the installer tries
>> to install it automatically, but it depends on libgcrypt1, which is not
>> in unstable (or testing or stable).
>>
>> I notice that packages.debian.org lists libopencdk4 as being
>> available only for amd64, and as this package is quite old,
>> I figure that it should simply be dropped.
>>
>> In trying to find reports of this problem, I found bug 272586,
>> which was supposed to have been fixed by changing the priority
>> of this package, amongst others.
>
> --
> Martin Michlmayr
> http://www.cyrius.com/
>From what I see (as non dak admin) the package should not be in the
archive (anymore). The following packages exists in the DB:
goswin@ivanova:~$ madison libopencdk4
libopencdk4 | 1:0.4.2-4 | unstable | amd64
goswin@ivanova:~$ madison opencdk
opencdk | 1:0.4.2-4 | unstable | source
goswin@ivanova:~$ madison opencdk8
opencdk8 | 0.5.5-10 | stable | source
opencdk8 | 0.5.7-2 | testing | source
opencdk8 | 0.5.7-2 | unstable | source
But the overrides, synced nightly from Debian, say only:
goswin@ivanova:/org/amd64.debian.net$ grep opencdk scripts/override/*sid*
scripts/override/override.sid.main:libopencdk8-dev optional libdevel
scripts/override/override.sid.main:libopencdk8-dbg extra libdevel
scripts/override/override.sid.main:libopencdk8 important libs
scripts/override/override.sid.main.src:opencdk8 libs
Going by the opencdk bugreport the package was removed around August
1st. Plenty of time for the amd64 rene to recommend its removal. Yet
it still remains. An ftp-master might have to intervene, that means
Ganneff or Aba. I messaged Ganneff on irc about this and he usualy
reads the amd64 list anyway.
MfG
Goswin
Reply to: