Bug#918372: unblock: med-fichier/4.0.0+repack-6
On Sun, Jan 06, 2019 at 08:28:33PM +0100, Paul Gevers wrote:
> Hi Adrian, Niels,
Hi Paul,
> On 06-01-2019 20:01, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> >> 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.
> >> ...
> >
> > despite libmed11 not being installed at all in the debci test?
>
> britney reads this to determine which packages (based on SRC) need to
> come from unstable for testing in testing.
>
> > You are saying that the (test) dependencies of gmsh/unstable matter when
> > testing gmsh/testing with med-fichier/unstable?
>
> Yes, because they are processed by britney. So if gmsh/testing and
> med-fichier/unstable aren't a good match based on information that
> britney has available, it will request the test with both from unstable.
> britney looks at the regular Depends/Breaks/Conflicts fields as well as
> the test dependencies.
>
> > That's unexpected compared to the normal dependency semantics.
>
> I agree, but this is how it is done now until we change it. We're open
> for suggestions and I assume the release team is open for patches as well.
when there is a reason for a maintainer to declare that a new upload
breaks the autopkgtest only of a reverse dependency, the logical
way would be someting like
X-Breaks-Autopkgtest-Of: gmsh (<< 3.0.6+dfsg1-4+b1)
This would be a proper interface for maintainers that doesn't expose
whatever black magic britney+debci are doing.
> >>> 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.
> >
> > Britney says for med-fichier:
> > old binaries left on amd64: libmed1v5, libmedc1v5 (from 4.0.0+repack-1) (but ignoring cruft, so nevermind)
> >
> > Installing one of these cruft packages that cannot ever migrate to
> > testing is the problem.
>
> Sure, but the root cause is that the combination to test isn't properly
> determined by britney. britney just doesn't know.
Britney says in excuses that the package is cruft.
> > Correct would be that this debci test does not pull in a single package
> > from unstable, since no non-cruft package depended on from gmsh/testing
> > is being provided by med-fichier/unstable.
>
> I don't agree. What we want to test is what happens if med-fichier has
> performed the transition from libmed5v1 to libmed11 and we try to move
> the set to testing.
Note that with smooth updates this is not a "set" - it does happen that
a so-name changing library package migrates to testing before any of the
reverse dependencies has been rebuilt.
With the new de facto default of 2 days for migrations it is not even rare.
The med-fichier binNMUs were 3 days after med-fichier was uploaded.
Without this debci issue med-fichier would have already migrated
before gmsh was binNMUed in unstable.
> Paul
cu
Adrian
--
"Is there not promise of rain?" Ling Tan asked suddenly out
of the darkness. There had been need of rain for many days.
"Only a promise," Lao Er said.
Pearl S. Buck - Dragon Seed
Reply to: