Bug#603680: libnautilus-extension1: breaks nautilus-share upgrade from lenny
On Tue, Nov 16, 2010 at 15:21, Holger Levsen <holger@layer-acht.org> wrote:
> as I was asked on IRC, this is how piuparts modifies apt+dpkgs
> defaults, "most interestingly" it doesnt install recommends...:
And that is the reason. (or at least the trigger)
First of all: I can't reproduce this E:-message, what i can see on the other
hand is that apt-lenny chooses to remove nautilus-share while apt-squeeze
doesn't if you disable installation of recommends -- both are equal if you do.
The (simplified) situation seems to be:
samba-common splits out samba-common-bin in squeeze and "only"
recommends it.
nautilus-share depends on: samba-common-bin | samba-common (<< squeeze)
At the time APT looks at nautilus-share everything is fine, later it will
upgrade samba and therefore samba-common "breaking" this dependency
(for the experts: That are the MarkInstall calls doing).
Not a problem as long as recommends are installed as these will bring in
the new -bin package on an other way, but if not the dependency is still
broken at the time we enter step 2: after upgrading all packages APT
looks again at each dependency in its problemresolver to resolve
exactly that: Problems -- apt-lenny has only two options:
a) step back from upgrading an offending package (held back)
b) remove the offending package
apt-squeeze recently (see #591882) got a third option:
c) try installing another or-group member
Note that while c) seems to be the "captain obvious" solution it introduces
a big problem: a) and b) reduce the number of broken packages,
but c) can add a lot more which could (real-world will tell if really)
work against the current resolver determinism…
So, what we could do now?
If i see it correctly, we basically have two options:
a) use a newer apt for upgrade
b) drop the or
b) isn't really an option as other cases will arise (and have already) so
i guess the release notes should recommend a) by upgrading dpkg, APT &
friends first as they did in last stable [0] -- even through the
"apt-get upgrade" (or equivalent) recommend in oldstable, stable and
testing [1] will also take care of it…
Best regards
David Kalnischkies (with his APT hat)
[0] http://www.debian.org/releases/stable/i386/release-notes/ch-upgrading.en.html#aptupgrade1st
[1] http://www.debian.org/releases/testing/i386/release-notes/ch-upgrading.en.html#minimal-upgrade
P.S.: If i am right, apt-lenny does install recommends by default,
which would make this bug an at least not default situation…
P.P.S.: Offtopic, but Holger, why does piuparts uses --fix-broken switch?
Reply to: