Re: base conflicting dependencies
On Mon, Oct 23, 2000 at 10:00:36PM -0700, Steve Bowman wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 24, 2000 at 03:08:57PM +1100, Glenn McGrath wrote:
> > I was trying to upgrade some packages in base, and had conflicting
> > dependencies, in my wisdom(?) i removed a couple of base packages.
> > shellutils conflicts with hurd,
> > Im not going to try and remove hurd
> > login depends on libc6, libc6 isnt available
> > libc0.2 is in base though
> > Do these conflicting dependencies serve some purpose or are they bugs?
> Both. They're bugs, but not easy to fix ones. The conflict is that hurd
> provides login and shellutils has a conflict with login <= someversion.
> Unfortunately, the debian packaging system doesn't (yet?) support
> versioned provides, so making shellutils happy isn't easy.
It's actually easier. The cvs version of dpkg I packaged wa simply broken
with regards to this. dpkg should ignore versioned conflicts for which
version-less provides exists. I will check if the latest CVS is fixed.
> This is
> really a packaging system bug and not a hurd bug.
> We really need
> arch-dependent dependencies. Are those supported? I don't know.
Mmmh. Interesting thought, but I think we can do for some time with
Provides. In those cases were the dependencies really get problematic,
there is still the possibility to hack the source to use a different
control file for different arch's.
> They also serve a useful purpose. They keep you from installing things
> that don't belong on a hurd system, like login, unless you force the
> wrong things. I find dselect useful for sorting out dependency conflicts.
login should really be removed from the ftp server. The real problem is
makedev, because it is arch-all (which could be considered a bug, too).
I hope with a fixed dpkg, those problems will vanish as they appeared with
the broken dpkg :)