Re: inconsistent versions of M-A: same packages
Hi,
On Wed, Nov 05, 2014 at 04:22:06PM +0100, Holger Levsen wrote:
> (also, btw, I couldn't find the daily DOSE runs linked from
> tttps://qa.debian.org/dose - did I miss it or is it missing?)
yes, you did miss something :-)
first link on the page: "Non-installable packages"
then you choose among the scenarios you are interested in, like
"unstable:main only" leads you to
https://qa.debian.org/dose/debcheck/unstable_main/index.html
> On Samstag, 1. November 2014, Wookey wrote:
> > +++ Marc Glisse [2014-11-01 11:45 +0100]:
> > > sorry for the naive question, but is there a plan for massively
> > > rebuilding all "Multi-Arch: same" packages that have inconsistent
> > > version numbers across architectures before releasing Jessie?
> > I don't know, but I think there should be. Thank you for bringing this
> > up. As you say, currently this is the only way to make multiarch
> > co-installability work properly.
>
> Ralf, does DOSE already detect such inconsistencies or how hard would it be
> to add support for that?
I am not sure what precisely is needed here :
1) if it is about detecting M-A=same packages with different version numbers
across different architectures : we currently do not detect this. The dose
library could be use to parse the different Packages files and then detect
these case, but IMHO this would be an overkill. A simple perl/python script
would do the job, or possibly an integration into (not-dose)-debcheck.
2) if you ask about co-installablity of packages with the same name but
different architectictures (and which are M-A=same) : this is a completely
different (and much more interesting) question. Since dose is now
multi-arch aware we can do this, but there are some questions to discuss
about the precise scenario. Is this what you meant ?
-Ralf.
Reply to: