Re: MBF Announcement: Transition libpng12 -> libpng16
Am Mittwoch, den 06.01.2016, 01:27 +0100 schrieb Samuel Thibault:
> Rene Engelhard, on Tue 05 Jan 2016 22:15:31 +0100, wrote:
> > On Tue, Jan 05, 2016 at 09:58:03PM +0100, Rene Engelhard wrote:
> > > On Tue, Jan 05, 2016 at 09:50:58PM +0100, Samuel Thibault wrote:
> > > > Rene Engelhard, on Tue 05 Jan 2016 21:43:33 +0100, wrote:
> > > > > So that it will immediately fail when something eventually
> > > > > picks
> > > > > up the experimental packages (as experimental buildds right
> > > > > now do in some
> > > > > situations)?
> > > >
> > > > ? No, experimental buildds only pick from experimental what is
> > > > not
> > > > available from sid. If something is available from sid, they
> > > > will pick
> > > > it up from there, even if experimental has a newer version.
> > >
> > > That is demonstrateable untrue since the resolver switch a few
> > > times ago.
> >
> > See e.g.
> >
> > https://buildd.debian.org/status/fetch.php?pkg=libreoffice&arch=i38
> > 6&ver=1%3A5.1.0~alpha1-3&stamp=1446915107
> >
> > firebird-dev in sid satifies the build-dep and still it was
> > installed from
> > experimental.
>
> Uh, I'm surprised, that's not what I thought was supposed to
> happen...
>
> Samuel
>
My observation during the mass-rebuild was to be really careful with
Provided packages (here the libpng-dev Package): If another B-D
requests explictly libpng12-dev, for example, the resolver WILL install
this as it thinks it will make everyone happy. That's why I have a hook
in my pbulder setup to *really ensure* that libpng16-dev is installed
before starting the real build.
Howver, I leave the exact layout of the new package up to the libpng
maintainers: They should decide how they want to do it...
(IMHO I'd love to have a real libpng-dev package which depends on the
real thing; this would enable to version B-Ds on libpng-dev..)
--
tobi
Reply to: