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

Re: recommended way to fix Bug#492814 ?



On Tue, Jul 29, 2008 at 09:49:36AM -0700, Ivan Kohler wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 28, 2008 at 09:52:24PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
> > On Mon, Jul 28, 2008 at 07:58:46PM -0700, Ivan Kohler wrote:

> >    * Revert to upstream 2.4.1 to get this compiled & working against lenny
> >      libxcrypt (closes: Bug#487487).

> > Why in the world, with that changelog entry, did the build-deps get changed
> > to point to a sid-only version of libxcrypt in the first place?

> They weren't.  The build-deps were changed to point to they previous 
> version of libxcrypt, which is in *lenny*.  They were changed not "just 
> because", but because the newer version isn't working, and there is 
> little chance of getting it working soon.

Ok; apparently I misread the control file.

  Build-Depends: [...] libxcrypt-dev (>= 2.4), libxcrypt-dev (< 3.0)

Apparently, my question was meant to be: why was a package uploaded to
unstable that build-depends on a version of libxcrypt that's only in
testing (since libxcrypt-dev 3.0-2 was uploaded over a month before your
libpam-unix2 upload)?  I'm not seeing how you expected this to work, so I'm
not sure what to recommend as a way out of this mess.

> > Also, why do you propose to address this by adding an epoch to a library
> > (which is never good),

> Precisely why I asked for advice before doing anything...  it did sound 
> like there might be a better way..

> > instead of fixing the libxcrypt build problem in
> > unstable and getting that unblocked?

> Perhaps I was unclear.

> Take a look at the bug report, please.

> To fix the libxcrypt build problem in unstable, I'll need to revert to 
> the previous version.

Why can't you *fix* the bug?  It's a trivial build failure to fix - just
stop building with -Werror.

> 3.0 currently in unstable is unsuitable for release.

For reasons other than the build failure?  That is certainly not evident
from the BTS.  If the build failure is the only reason, I don't see why you
wouldn't just fix it.  If there are other reasons, they should be documented
in the BTS.

> How do you suggest I revert to libxcrypt 2.4 to fix the build problems 
> in unstable *without* using a library epoch?

I don't.

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


Reply to: