Bug#649460: release.debian.org: improved architecture annotation in dependency analysis script/page
retitle 649460 release.debian.org: arch-specific output in dependency analysis
thanks
On Thu, Nov 24, 2011 at 3:18 AM, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
> Dependency analysis only derives its output from Sources + i386, which is
> precisely _why_ it's showing ia32-libs-dev as unavailable. It's not being
> mentioned because it's unavailable on kfreebsd-amd64, it's being mentioned
> because it's unavailable _on i386_.
I did finally just realize this as stated in my last message :( My bad.
> If we annotated the dependencies, it
> would say "wine-unstable[i386] depends on ia32-libs-dev which is not
> available in testing", which doesn't seem like it would be helpful.
But wine-unstable[i386] does not build-depend on ia32-libs-dev at all,
and that wouldn't make any sense. So, it seems another problem here
is that the "ia32-libs-dev [amd64 kfreebsd-amd64]" build-depends is
being interpreted wrongly.
> It's also broken because it mixes build-dependencies and runtime
> dependencies together - the binary packages produced by wine don't depend on
> ia32-libs-dev - but that's a side issue.
That's the confusing part, especially since build-depends don't affect
testing migration. It seems unnecessarily confusing to list any of
those until they actually matter (bug #145257).
>> Anyway, I think my original point remains
>
> Your original point seemed to be that you'd "worked out" that ia32-libs-dev not
> being in testing on kfreebsd-amd64 was somehow affecting the wine-unstable
> packages. What I've been trying to do is to point out to you why you were
> mistaken in what you believed that page showed, before you wasted any
> further time attempting to fix issues that don't exist. :-/ (The failures on
> amd64 and powerpc do matter, otoh).
I suppose I have a tendency of being too verbose and just dumping my
working memory sometimes. It seems to have significantly distracted
from the small problem that I was trying to convey here. I actually
don't care that much about wine-unstable migration, but I was quickly
glancing at that at the time, saw problems, and quickly wrote it up.
Anyway, I'll look into patching it now that it's clear whats wrong.
Best wishes,
Mike
Reply to: