Re: Proposed MBF: Removal of libfreetype6-dev (causing FTBFS)
On 2023-08-19 Diederik de Haas <didi.debian@cknow.org> wrote:
> [please CC me as I'm not subscribed to debian-devel]
> On Mon, 17 Jul 2023 at 21:45:13 +1000, Hugh McMaster wrote:
> > On Mon, 17 Jul 2023 at 00:07, Simon McVittie wrote:
> > > On Sun, 16 Jul 2023 at 22:38:20 +1000, Hugh McMaster wrote:
> > > > Currently, there are 219 build-dependencies and 29 (direct)
> > > > dependencies on libfreetype6-dev, which has been released with
> > > > bullseye and bookworm.
[...]
> > > Lintian diagnoses this as "[build-]depends-on-obsolete-package" since
[...]
> > Thanks for pointing this out. I wasn't aware Lintian had started
> > flagging dependencies on obsolete packages some 10 months ago.
> > Having Lintian issue a warning or error instead of bug filing is preferable.
> While it's true that lintian did issue an error, now that src:freetype has
> been updated and libfreetype6-dev has been dropped, there are a number of
> packages which hadn't been updated and now FTBFS.
[...]
> As the FTBFS wrt libfreetype6-dev was predicted and announced [1], wouldn't it
> have been better if the MBF had taken place?
> What is the recommended/appropriate way to deal with such issues?
The agreed reached was not "let's ignore it, lintian has been warning
about it". Instead a way forward that /should/ have avoided any breakage
(versioned provides) was proposed and chosen.
https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2023/07/msg00193.html
cu Andreas
Reply to: