Bug#934215: qtbase5-dev: trying to overwrite shared ....png which is different from other instances of the package
Hi Marc!
On 19/08/08 11:22, Marc Glisse wrote:
> Package: qtbase5-dev
> Version: 5.11.3+dfsg1-2+b1
> Severity: normal
>
> Dear Maintainer,
>
> during my daily apt upgrade, I got this error:
>
> Unpacking qtbase5-dev:i386 (5.11.3+dfsg1-2+b1) over (5.11.3+dfsg1-2) ...
> dpkg: error processing archive /tmp/apt-dpkg-install-OL1lMs/021-qtbase5-dev_5.11.3+dfsg1-2+b1_i386.deb (--unpack):
> trying to overwrite shared '/usr/share/qt5/doc/global/template/images/Qt-logo.png', which is different from other instances of package qtbase5-dev:i386
>
> (I have the amd64 and i386 versions installed)
Interesting, that has never happened before.
> I had to use dpkg --force-overwrite to work around it, which showed the
> additional messages:
>
> Preparing to unpack .../qtbase5-dev_5.11.3+dfsg1-2+b1_i386.deb ...
> Unpacking qtbase5-dev:i386 (5.11.3+dfsg1-2+b1) over (5.11.3+dfsg1-2) ...
> dpkg: warning: overriding problem because --force enabled:
> dpkg: warning: trying to overwrite shared '/usr/share/qt5/doc/global/template/images/Qt-logo.png', which is different from other instances of package qtbase5-dev:i386
> dpkg: warning: overriding problem because --force enabled:
> dpkg: warning: trying to overwrite shared '/usr/share/qt5/doc/global/template/images/ico_out.png', which is different from other instances of package qtbase5-dev:i386
> dpkg: warning: overriding problem because --force enabled:
> dpkg: warning: trying to overwrite shared '/usr/share/qt5/doc/global/template/style/list_arrow.png', which is different from other instances of package qtbase5-dev:i386
> dpkg: warning: overriding problem because --force enabled:
> dpkg: warning: trying to overwrite shared '/usr/share/qt5/doc/global/template/style/list_expand.png', which is different from other instances of package qtbase5-dev:i386
>
> Usually, for a multiarch issue, the +b1 in the version number would make me suspicious, but maybe not here, the image seems to contain a creation time.
So we have two issues here:
- On one side those images should not have a creation date due to
reproducibility. Actually this has never happened before and buildds might
have built everything in deifferent dates.
- On the other I wonder why I left those files there. This comes from 2015,
so I'll have to dig into it further.
Thanks *a lot* for the bug report!
Reply to:
