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

Re: diskless package not in update_excuses?

On Sun, Jan 14, 2001 at 11:41:32AM +1100, Brian May wrote:
> Why?

  diskless |      0.3.6 |        stable | all
  diskless |     0.3.10 |       testing | all
  diskless |     0.3.10 |      unstable | all

Because version 0.3.10 is already in testing.

> Maybe it is because it is listed in "Problems in unstable":
>      * Binaries from diskless 0.3.10 cannot be installed:
>           + diskless(hurd-i386)

This means that on hurd-i386, the dependencies for diskless aren't
(and can't be) satisfied (at least if you only look at the packages
in unstable).

>           + diskless(mipsel)
>           + diskless(sh)
>           + diskless-image-secure(hurd-i386)
>           + diskless-image-secure(mipsel)
>           + diskless-image-secure(sh)
>           + diskless-image-simple(hurd-i386)
>           + diskless-image-simple(mipsel)
>           + diskless-image-simple(sh)

You'll note further that the above are all unreleased architectures were
listed above. Naturally, these don't affect testing at all.

In addition, though, there were:

>           + diskless(arm)
>           + diskless-image-secure(arm)
>           + diskless-image-simple(arm)

which also don't affect things because I'm letting arm stay a little bit
broken at the moment.

> I think there are several issues:
> 1. these packages are "Architecture: all", why is i386 not listed?

Presumably because the package installs perfectly fine on i386.

> 2. Why is diskless "not installable" anyway, I have never had any bug
> reports... Perhaps this is a debconf issue?

The reason it's not installable on arm, eg, seems to be that there's
no perl-5.005 binary in sid for it (which libdigest-md5-perl appears
to depend on). I would imagine there are similar reasons for the other

> 3. diskless-image-* are only designed to be installed on an NFS-root
> image directory. Is this going to be a serious problem trying to get
> them into testing? This is required in order for apt-get to
> automatically upgrade the package. 

I have no idea. testing only looks at declared dependencies and bugs,
I imagine it wouldn't even have a clue that the diskless-image-* stuff
requires an NFS-root.


Anthony Towns <aj@humbug.org.au> <http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/>
I don't speak for anyone save myself. GPG signed mail preferred.

     ``Thanks to all avid pokers out there''
                       -- linux.conf.au, 17-20 January 2001

Attachment: pgp7ZTTr2Itx0.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: