Bug#972936: libgcc-s1 needs Breaks: libgcc1 (<< 1:10)
Control: subscribe -1
On Tue, Oct 27, 2020 at 03:45:59PM +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> Control: severity -1 grave
>
> On Tue, Oct 27, 2020 at 12:44:44PM +0100, Matthias Klose wrote:
> > Control: severity -1 important
> >
> > On 10/26/20 1:04 PM, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> > > Package: libgcc-s1
> > > Version: 10.2.0-15
> > > Severity: grave
> > >
> > > On a buster system, with unstable pinned to low priority:
> >
> > Lowering the severity. Feel free to correct me if this specific configuration
> > deserves RC severity.
>
> This is pretty exactly the problem described in
> https://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-relationships.html#id11
>
> Losing libgcc1 is extra bad, since so much (including apt) uses it.
>
> Hard to recover when you hit the problem, and trivial to fix.
It's not trivial to fix, if it's fixable at all. Adding the Breaks
can cause the library to disappear in the middle of the upgrade,
because libgcc1 is upgraded first or temporarily removed, which
is the reason it's not there.
I thought about hacking a workaround into apt that prevents you
from removing libgcc-s1 if libgcc1 is installed, but that's not
super helpful as you need a current apt.
My suggestion is to set XB-Important: yes and Protected: yes on
libgcc-s1 such that people cannot easily remove it after it's
installed.
We can then remove that bit in bookworm.
--
debian developer - deb.li/jak | jak-linux.org - free software dev
ubuntu core developer i speak de, en
Reply to: