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
architectures.
> 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.
Cheers,
aj
--
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:
pgphKzePiH8HY.pgp
Description: PGP signature