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

Re: icu, vips transition to testing

Steve Langasek <vorlon@debian.org> wrote:

> On Mon, Sep 19, 2005 at 04:45:31PM -0400, Jay Berkenbilt wrote:
>> Though grep-excuses shows them to be valid candidates, both icu and
>> vips appear to be not transitioning to testing because of making
>> packages uninstallable on alpha (according to
>> http://bjorn.haxx.se/debian/testing.pl?package=icu and corresponding
>> for vips), but I don't see any evidence that they actually will make
>> packages uninstallable on alpha.  Am I missing something (including
>> possibly some announcement), or is something wrong?
> Standard scenario requiring a hint to update multiple packages together.
> This isn't done automatically because it's computationally infeasible.
> Hints added for both of these package groups which should take effect
> tomorrow as long as there are no other packages that still need to be
> updated in unstable.

Is the scenario in question that package A2 replaces package A1 and a
new version of package B that used to depend upon A1 now depends upon
A2 such that replacing A1 with A2 would make B in testing
uninstallable even though an upgrade of B would resolve the problem?
(That's a mouthful.)  I'd have to think a bit to convince myself that
detecting this in the general case would be computationally infeasible
(though it seems like a distinct possibility that it would be for
large numbers of dependencies), but I can certainly accept that it is
tricky to code and, more importantly, not currently coded, so thanks
for the hint. :-)


Reply to: