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

Bug#872054: gcc-multilib: installation of gcc-X-multilib should not yield the installation of the default gcc

Package: gcc-multilib
Version: 4:7.1.0-2
Severity: wishlist

gcc-multilib currently provides two independent features:
1. the /usr/include/asm symbolic link (which has nothing to do with a
   specific GCC version);
2. depends on the default GCC version (currently via gcc-7-multilib).

Because on that, one currently has the following issue if one wants
to install a non-default multilib GCC version, e.g. gcc-6-multilib:

1. gcc-6-multilib (like the other gcc-X-multilib packages) depends on
2. libc6-dev-i386 recommends[*] gcc-multilib.
3. gcc-multilib depends on the default multilib GCC version, currently

[*] currently suggests, but this will be reverted to recommends
    because the /usr/include/asm symbolic link is needed any
    gcc-X-multilib compiler:

So, installing gcc-6-multilib has the effect to install gcc-7-multilib,
while the user may just want version 6.

Something needs to be done to avoid that. Shouldn't the
/usr/include/asm symbolic link be provided either by libc6-dev-i386
or by the individual gcc-X-multilib packages, for instance? In such a
case, libc6-dev-i386 would no longer need to recommend gcc-multilib.

-- System Information:
Debian Release: buster/sid
  APT prefers unstable-debug
  APT policy: (500, 'unstable-debug'), (500, 'unstable'), (500, 'testing'), (500, 'stable'), (1, 'experimental')
Architecture: amd64 (x86_64)
Foreign Architectures: i386

Kernel: Linux 4.11.0-2-amd64 (SMP w/12 CPU cores)
Locale: LANG=POSIX, LC_CTYPE=en_US.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8), LANGUAGE=POSIX (charmap=UTF-8)
Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/dash
Init: systemd (via /run/systemd/system)

Versions of packages gcc-multilib depends on:
ii  cpp             4:7.1.0-2
ii  gcc             4:7.1.0-2
ii  gcc-7-multilib  7.1.0-13
ii  linux-libc-dev  4.11.11-1

gcc-multilib recommends no packages.

gcc-multilib suggests no packages.

-- no debconf information

Reply to: