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

Bug#755127: marked as done (unnecessary conflict with libgcv5)



Your message dated Sat, 19 Jul 2014 14:18:03 +0200
with message-id <53CA61FB.4080103@debian.org>
and subject line Re: unnecessary conflict with libgcv5
has caused the Debian Bug report #755127,
regarding unnecessary conflict with libgcv5
to be marked as done.

This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.

(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact owner@bugs.debian.org
immediately.)


-- 
755127: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=755127
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact owner@bugs.debian.org with problems
--- Begin Message ---
Package: libgvc6
Version: 2.38.0-1
Severity: serious

libgvc6 conflicts against libgvc5. Having different packages
per ABI is also done to make them co-installable, which is kind of
defeated by this conflict and makes library transitions unnecessary
complex.

There doesn't seem to be any file conflict, making this conflict
arbitrary.


-e System Information:
Debian Release: jessie/sid
  APT prefers unstable
  APT policy: (500, 'unstable'), (200, 'experimental')
Architecture: amd64 (x86_64)
Foreign Architectures: i386

Kernel: Linux 3.14-1-amd64 (SMP w/4 CPU cores)
Locale: LANG=de_DE.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=de_DE.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8)
Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/dash

--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
> There doesn't seem to be any file conflict,
> making this conflict arbitrary.

wrong, the plugins conflict.

> libgvc6 conflicts against libgvc5.

yes, I don't see a good way to upgrade. you could split out the plugins, but
then what kind of worth has libgvc5?  It's my understanding that the library
itself is unusable without the basic plugins.

--- End Message ---

Reply to: