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

Re: Very Large Package Set Upgrade, stage 1



On Sun, Nov 26, 2006 at 05:35:01PM +0100, Bill Allombert wrote:
> > Wow, that's much better than it sounded from your earlier messages.  I was
> > worried when you mentioned the x11-common conflict issue (a horrible upgrade
> > path that I take full blame for), since I don't know what we could do to fix
> > that...

> I am afraid the x11-common issue affect us.

How is x11-common causing problems?  There was no mention of specifics in
your posts, and the packages discussed so far all seem to have other
explanations?

> > I see an RC bug has already been filed on amarok for its circular deps, and
> > I know that an NMU is already being prepared to break this circular dep,
> > great!  Do we have an explanation yet for the other removals?  The aspell
> > ones in particular seem like a big deal.

> It looks like a cross-distribution circular dependencies:

> sarge: aspell: Depends: aspell-bin, aspell-en | aspell6-dictionary
> sarge: aspell-en: Depends: libaspell15 (>> 0.60)

> etch: aspell: Depends: libaspell15 (>= 0.60), libc6 (>= 2.3.6-6), libgcc1 (>= 1:4.1.0), libncursesw5 (>= 5.4-5), libstdc++6 (>= 4.1.0), libaspell15 (= 0.60.4-4), dictionaries-common (>> 0.40)
> etch: aspell-en Depends: aspell (>= 0.60.3-2)

> But I did not go farther than that.

Looks like the new libaspell15 conflicts with aspell6-dictionary, which is
the virtual package provided by the old aspell-$lang packages, and the new
aspell doesn't depend on the new dictionaries, it only has a recommends on
aspell-en | aspell-dictionary | aspell6a-dictionary.  Do you think this
warrants a bug on aspell?

Cheers,
-- 
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/



Reply to: