Hi,
(Initially a mail/question to the X team as I wasn't entirely sure,
but the more I look at it, the more it looks like a serious bug in
src:libx11, nothing else.)
Spotted via dose's reporting lots of uninstallable udebs on arm64: I'm
not sure new shlibs for libx11-6 are correct, with various libx*
packages now depending on libx11-xcb1 (not a udeb).
https://d-i.debian.org/dose/graph-unstable-arm64.png
The new debian/rules has:
override_dh_makeshlibs:
dh_makeshlibs -a -plibx11-6 -V'libx11-6 (>= 2:1.6.0)' --add-udeb=libx11-6-udeb -- -c4
dh_makeshlibs -a -plibx11-xcb1 -V'libx11-xcb1' -- -c4
dh_makeshlibs -a -Nlibx11-6 -Nlibx11-xcb1 -- -c4
which leads to the following for libx11-6.shlibs (amd64):
libX11 6 libx11-xcb1
udeb: libX11 6 libx11-xcb1
Meanwhile, libx11-xcb1 has:
libX11-xcb 1 libx11-xcb1
which seems to match the intent in changelog.
Out of curiosity, pausing the build after the first dh_makeshlibs call,
the shlibs for libx11-6 is indeed correct:
libX11 6 libx11-6 (>= 2:1.6.0)
udeb: libX11 6 libx11-6-udeb (>= 2:1.6.0)
and the second one is responsible for busting it up, since afterwards
it's amended to become what's found in the package:
libX11 6 libx11-xcb1
udeb: libX11 6 libx11-xcb1
So it looks like some confusion due to the -a/-p/-N combinations?
Going back to pausing between first and second dh_makeshlibs calls,
here's the slibs file for libx11-xcb1…
libX11-xcb 1 libx11-6 (>= 2:1.6.0)
udeb: libX11-xcb 1 libx11-6 (>= 2:1.6.0)
which convinces me the flag combinations aren't fine as they are.
Cheers,
--
Cyril Brulebois (kibi@debian.org) <https://debamax.com/>
D-I release manager -- Release team member -- Freelance Consultant
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature