Re: Bug#591881: vlc-nox: package fails to upgrade properly from lenny
2010/8/27 Reinhard Tartler <siretart@tauware.de>:
> On Thu, Aug 26, 2010 at 17:29:43 (CEST), David Kalnischkies wrote:
>
>> 2010/8/26 Reinhard Tartler <siretart@tauware.de>:
>>> I'm still waiting for an answer on this question. Is this issue solved
>>> with the latest upload, or do you prefer me to upload the patch posted
>>> above?
>>
>> It would be nice if you could fix it in your package
>> (which at least feels a bit cleaner anyway: liba2 breaks liba1
>> sounds saner than libpartlyunrelated breaks liba1).
>
> After preparing an upload for this, I've tried to reproduce this issue
> myself in a virtual machine. The thing is, I've not been able to
> reproduce this neither with lenny's apt, nor squeeze's apt (0.7.25.3)
> nor sid's (0.8.0) apt.
>
> What I've did was:
>
> - do a basic lenny installation
> - apt-get install install ffmpeg
> - sed -i s,lenny,sid,g /etc/apt/sources.list
> - apt-get update -qq
> - apt-get install ffmpeg
- do a basic lenny installation
- apt-get install vlc-nox
- sed -i s,lenny,sid,g /etc/apt/sources.list
- apt-get update -qq
- apt-get dist-upgrade
should show the problem ( i don't test it with chroot but
by creating status and Packages files with the package
universe needed as used by apt/test/integration/ as i don't
want to test the actual installation, but the theory is the same ).
As i tried to describe above APT rates the package which should
be removed as too important - at least compared to the package
it can fix with this remove, so if you see this error or not depends
on the installed packages:
With ffmpeg is the dependency chain strong enough to indicate
that libavcodec51 has to leave, if you have only vlc-nox (which doesn't
require ffmpeg) installed the chain isn't strong enough.
Also, requesting a package explicitly with install will modify the
scoring so you will likely get a different situation compared to a
dist-upgrade.
So, in summary: Its possible that no "normal" user will ever
see this upgrade problem as such a user will likely have more
packages installed which depend on these libav* stuff…
(you only need to define what a "normal" user is now…)
Best regards
David Kalnischkies
Reply to: