Bug#1092278: libc6-dev-i386 and libc6-dev-s390 have undeclared file conflicts

[Helmut Grohne <helmut@subdivi.de>]

Hi Aurelien,

On Wed, Jan 08, 2025 at 07:57:42PM +0100, Aurelien Jarno wrote:
> I can confirm that. That said I am a bit surprised that you only mention
> these two. For instance libc6-dev-s390 and libc6-dev-i386 also both
> conflict with libc6-dev-mipsn32.

I had problems importing mips64el as bookworm's qemu was not properly
emulating it (bookworm-backports does). Hence my dataset missed mips64el
at the time of reporting.

> I guess there are many more conflicts on ports architectures, but I
> guess your QA tools only look at the main archive.

I have not looked into ports at all.

> Yes, it's something possible, however given the above, I wonder if we
> should just map the libc6-$arch conflicts to the libc6-dev-$arch ones.
> It's sometimes overkill when there are no real file conflicts, but
> that's probably easier to not miss any conflict and that doesn't break
> anything either. Anyway, as you pointed above they are already not
> co-installable so it doesn't break anything.

I concur with mapping the Conflicts from libc6-$arch to libc6-dev-$arch.
The negative effects of excessive Conflicts are hardly noticeable and
the mirroring significantly eases maintenance down the road. Would you
do the implementation or rather have me work out a patch?

Helmut