On Thursday 29 October 2015 16:04:31 Gary Dale wrote:
[snip]
Non the less if you have good ideas to help the bright people to improve
the system believe me we are eager to know them :)
[snip]
If a new version of a dependency breaks something, then the dependency
version should be marked in the main package. In this case you seem to
be saying that the main package requires a version < whatever the new
library package is. Surely someone along the line should have recognized
the potential breakage when they "improved" the qt5x11extras5 package
and created a new version of the main package to stop the library from
being updated.
Correct! That was what qtbase-abi-x-y-z was meant to do... until we found this
corner case :)
Not knowing the details of the packages, I am accepting your explanation
that a single package created all this mayhem with KDE programs.
Well, at least some part of it. There might be other bugs around.
This
makes it all the more obvious that the package should not have been let
out without the main packages. Doesn't anyone keep a Debian/testing
machine to look for these problems?
I keep my machines in sid to see nothing breaks there, which is the first
step. We are really two people (plus some more packagers that from time to
time push some fix) behind Qt, so if you want to help us by testing testing
(aka testing stretch), you are most welcomed :)
Beware that in order to catch this one you would need to do your own britney
to migrate packages and test.