Hi Adrian, On 06-01-2019 19:05, Adrian Bunk wrote: > On Sun, Jan 06, 2019 at 12:35:05PM +0100, Paul Gevers wrote: >> Hi Gilles, >> >> On Sat, 05 Jan 2019 17:04:05 +0100 Gilles Filippini <pini@debian.org> wrote: >>> Please unblock package med-fichier. Is has currently to wait for 43 days >>> because of an autopkgtest regression against the version of gmsh in testing >>> (3.0.6+dfsg1-4) [1]. But it succeeds against version 3.0.6+dfsg1-4.1 in >>> unstable [1] which waiting for med-fichier to migrate [2]. >> >> You can also handle this yourself by one of the following solutions: >> >> - in med-fichier: in any of the binary packages add a *versioned* breaks >> on any of the binary packages from gmsh. > > There is no package where you could place such a Breaks. > > The only package the gmsh autopkgtest picks up from unstable is the > broken cruft package libmed1v5. That is because gmsh from testing links to libmed1v5. Adding this *versioned* breaks to libmed11 (albeit being a bit ridiculous from the archive point of view) would do the right thing AFAICT. > No package that is still built by med-fichier/unstable is installed > in the relevant autopkgtest. Sure, that is because not *both* gmsh and med-fichier come from unstable, if they were (I'll trigger a test run to prove my point), gmsh would install libmed11 AFAICT. >> - in gmsh: add a *versioned* test dependency on any of the med-fichier >> binary packages > > This won't help since gmsh/testing is being tested. Sure, but by adding this, britney will request debci to use the autopkgtest of gmsh from unstable rather than from testing. > And gmsh can't migrate before med-fichier. But autopkgtests / apt don't care about that. >> - in gmsh: in any of the binary packages add a *versioned* dependency on >> any of the binary packages from med-fichier > > This won't help since gmsh/testing is being tested. > And gmsh can't migrate before med-fichier. Same as above. >> The result of any of the actions above is that the autopkgtests will be >> done with both packages from unstable and will be used for both >> migrations. I didn't spend the time on the relations to see which is >> most appropriate in your case. > > I don't think any of the above would help. We disagree than. However, as I wrote the code in britney, let's assume I am right then? > The root problem is that debci installs cruft packages from unstable. Care to elaborate what you mean here? debci doesn't install anything. It's apt that installs stuff. Based on a slightly odd configuration put in place by autopkgtest on request of debci which got its trigger from britney. Paul
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature