Bug#1011365: bullseye-pu: package nvidia-cuda-toolkit/11.2.2-3+deb11u2
On Mon, 2022-05-30 at 17:31 +0200, Andreas Beckmann wrote:
> On 29/05/2022 16.16, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
> > Unfortunately the amd64 upload got rejected:
> >
> > Version check failed:
> > Your upload included the binary package nvidia-openjdk-8-jre,
> > version
> > 9.+8u332-ga-1~deb9u1~11.2.2-3+deb11u2, for amd64,
> > however experimental already has version 9.+8u332-ga-1~11.5.1-2.
> > Uploads to proposed-updates must have a lower version than present
> > in
> > experimental.
>
> Oh yes. 1~d < 1
> 1~d~1 > 1~1
>
> Is there a similar constraint for sid as well? I would have expected
> that to trigger first ... and probably s/already/only/ ...
>
Surprisingly not. I have a feeling there once was, but it was removed.
I'm not entirely sure on that though; memory can play tricks.
The current checks are:
adsb@coccia:$ dak admin v-c list-suite proposed-updates
proposed-updates MustBeNewerThan oldoldoldstable
proposed-updates MustBeNewerThan oldoldstable
proposed-updates MustBeNewerThan stable
proposed-updates Enhances stable
proposed-updates MustBeNewerThan oldstable
proposed-updates MustBeOlderThan experimental
> Before I upload a fix, I'd like you to double check that these
> versions do not validate the ordering rules:
>
> nvidia-openjdk-8-jre_9.+8u332-ga-1~~deb9u1~11.2.2-3+deb11u3_amd64.deb
> nvidia-openjdk-8-jre_9.+8u312-b07-1~11.2.2+8u302-b08-1~11.2.2-
> 3+deb11u3_ppc64el.deb
>
nvidia-openjdk-8-jre | 9.+8u332-ga-1~11.4.3-3 | testing/non-free | amd64, ppc64el
nvidia-openjdk-8-jre | 9.+8u332-ga-1~11.4.3-3 | unstable/non-free | amd64, ppc64el
nvidia-openjdk-8-jre | 9.+8u332-ga-1~11.5.1-2 | experimental/non-free | amd64, ppc64el
$ dpkg --compare-versions "9.+8u332-ga-1~~deb9u1~11.2.2-3+deb11u3" lt "9.+8u332-ga-1~11.4.3-3" && echo y
y
$ dpkg --compare-versions "9.+8u312-b07-1~11.2.2+8u302-b08-1~11.2.2-3+deb11u3" lt "9.+8u332-ga-1~11.4.3-3" && echo y
y
Both look OK so far as I can see, and already sort below the version in
testing so don't present any issues with prop-ups etc.
Regards,
Adam
Reply to: