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

Bug#911169: console-setup: can vidcontrol and kbdcontrol depends be removed for non-kfreebsd archs?



Package: console-setup
Severity: wishlist


Holger Wansing <linux@wansing-online.de> wrote:
> Holger Wansing <hwansing@mailbox.org> wrote:
> > I noticed that the latest upload of console-setup fails to
> > migrate to testing.
> > It claims being "uninstallable on amd64", while
> > https://buildd.debian.org/status/fetch.php?pkg=console-setup&arch=all&ver=1.185&stamp=1534275854&raw=0
> > says that the build was successful.
> > 
> > How can I find out what is wrong here?
> 
> Hmm, at the 15. day it migrated to testing now, while I cannot see that 
> something has changed.

console-setup needs several attempts everytime, 'til it migrates.

The point is, that autopkgtest claims about unmet dependencies for all
archs (packages vidcontrol and kbdcontrol being unavailable).
However, these packages are only existing for kfreebsd.

Why does console-setup depend on it on all archs?
Can the control file be changed for console-setup-freebsd as below?


  Package: console-setup-freebsd
  Section: utils
  Priority: optional
  Architecture: all
  Multi-Arch: foreign
- Depends: vidcontrol, kbdcontrol, keyboard-configuration (= ${source:Version}), ${misc:Depends}, init-system-helpers (>= 1.29~) | initscripts
+ Depends: vidcontrol [kfreebsd-any], kbdcontrol [kfreebsd-any], keyboard-configuration (= ${source:Version}), ${misc:Depends}, init-system-helpers (>= 1.29~) | initscripts
  Suggests: console-setup
  Conflicts: console-setup-linux
  Breaks: console-setup (<< 1.71)
  Replaces: console-setup (<< 1.71)
  Description: FreeBSD specific part of console-setup
   This package includes raw, uuencoded fonts and various screen maps.


console-setup-freebsd is not needed on archs other than kfreebsd, I suspect?
Or am I missing something?


Holger



-- 
Holger Wansing <hwansing@mailbox.org>
PGP-Finterprint: 496A C6E8 1442 4B34 8508  3529 59F1 87CA 156E B076


Reply to: