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

Re: How to get KDE in: total analysis

On Sat, Oct 29, 2005 at 05:07:49PM -0400, Nathanael Nerode wrote:
> I expect that gcc-4.0 blockages are only going to increase as
> time goes on, because some maintainers can't seem to stop making
> uploads, so the faster this can be done, the better.

> Now, it's true that no matter what we do, a bunch of stuff will be stuck
> behind binutils/glibc/gcc-4.0, which is going to take a while, probably
> a month or more.  (It's not reasonable to force them through given the
> build failures and grave bugs in binutils and glibc.)

And without forcing them, this: 

> force kdeaddons/4:3.4.2-2.1

will not work because a force hint will not cause consideration of packages
which britney eliminates due to dependencies.

Which means the only way to force kdeaddons is by also forcing gcc-4.0,
binutils, and glibc.  Forcing binutils will succeed, because its
out-of-dateness on some architectures won't render anything else
uninstallable; glibc will also succeed for the same reason; and I suspect
that gcc-4.0 will follow as well.  We don't want this -- these packages are
all *much* buggier than the versions in testing right now, and it definitely
doesn't help our users to push them into testing.

And kdeaddons can't be removed from testing, or be left broken in testing,
without also breaking the kde metapackage.  Actually, the kde metapackage is
currently broken *anyway*, but I'm not sure yet if leaving it broken and
removing a number of other relevant packages to get this transition in is a
good trade-off given that the toolchain still needs to be fixed no matter
what, and preferably ASAP.

Until that decision is made, I'm afraid the rest of this analysis is largely
irrelevant.  In any case, please see
http://ftp-master.debian.org/~vorlon/KDE-missing-bysource.txt for a separate

Incidentally, I count a total of 13 force hints in your email, all of which
actually have to be force-hint hints as well (and most of which actually
block on gcc-4.0...).  As many of these are multi-binary packages, leaving
them all in testing in an uninstallable state is not appropriate; and
removing them significantly diminishes the usability of the KDE environment
in testing, and is also something I'm generally averse to for packages that
are themselves not RC-buggy and which aren't going to be able to get back in
any time soon.  If you want to help move the KDE transition forward, please
work on figuring out how to get the toolchain back into shape.

Steve Langasek                   Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS
Debian Developer                   to set it on, and I can move the world.
vorlon@debian.org                                   http://www.debian.org/

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: