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

Fwd: Bug#115234: bison++: conflict with bison and tasksel



-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

I have gotten complicated bug here and need some advice.  

From: laurent bonnaud <Laurent.Bonnaud@inpg.fr>

Hi,

when I use tasksel and choose the C/C++ development task, tasksel wants to
replace bison++ with bison.

The following packages will be REMOVED:
  bison++
The following NEW packages will be installed:
  bison

This is because bison belongs to this task and bison++ conflicts with bison.
However I would like to keep bison++ because this is a more capable package.

There are a least 2 ways to fix this:

 1. replace bison with bison++ in this task or teach tasksel to handle 2
    conflicting packages.

 2. have bison and bison++ coexist on the same system.

Solution 2 should not be too hard because in the bison++ package
 /usr/bin/bison is a link to /usr/bin/bison++ (only both manpages are
 different).  The bison++ package could only provide the /usr/bin/bison++
 binary and perhaps depend on the bison package to provide /usr/bin/bison.
- -------------------------------------------------------------------------

The problem here isn't that the manpages conflict. They only document bison 
functionality and can easily be removed from bison++, given that bison++ 
depend on bison. 

The real problem here is that bison++ source can't use automake since 
automake isn't bison++ aware. With a link bison -> bison++ I fooled 
automake/autoconf to treat bison++ as a super bison. Since bison++ provides 
all the functionality of bison and I made a Provides: bison field in 
debian/control it thought that this was a good thing. The longterm solution 
to this is of course to make automake bison++ aware. But that will take a LOT 
of time and I want to close this bug soon in order to reduce response time 
to the user.  


How should I handle this delicate situation ? 
- -- 
Magnus Ekdahl
+46-739-287181
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org

iD8DBQE7xdAfGYdLGBITefYRAgfQAJ9OjQLaHW+yrwqQ8FxFbiMdDxAbUgCgknjV
ugYWHoRbL9Ww2r85qA2ATRU=
=TR8i
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----



Reply to: