Re: missing package conflicts
On Wednesday 16 April 2008 02:58:52 pm Ralf Treinen wrote:
> The following list contains packages that fail to install at the same time
> since one package tries to overwrite a file owned by the other package:
> In these package pairs, (at least) one of the two packages must declare
> a conflict with the other package.
> I will file bugs soon (hopefully before leaving on [VAC] on 18/4). One
> interesting question is: against which of the conflicting packages
> should the bug be filed? The less popular one according to popcon? The
> more recent one in the archive? The one with the more active
> Here is how the clashes were detected:
> 1) generate from the Contents file a list of package pairs that contain
> at least one common file.
> 2) use pkglab (one of the EDOS tools, debian packages are pending) to
> select from the list obtained in (1) those pairs of packages that are
> installable at the same time when looking only at dependency relationships.
> 3) try installing the packages obtained from (2) in a sid chroot.
> Some statistics for amd64/sid:
> - 2432104 files listed in the Contents file
> - 867 package pairs that contain at least one common file
> - 102 package pairs that contain at least one common file, and that are
> co-installable according to the EDOS criteria
> - 27 package pairs that fail to install together due to attempted file
I'd be interested in seeing how there can be 75 package pairs with shared file
names which coinstall successfully. In the case of a Replaces making that
possible, I'd say that the package with files being replaced should usually
have a bug report submitted to get those obsolete files removed. On the
other hand, if there's a diversion involved, that seems fine.