On Sun, Nov 02, 2003 at 09:39:23PM -0500, Adam C Powell IV wrote: > Okay, finally finished building this morning (various difficulties), and > installed successfully; just uploaded. Sorry about the delay. > > And good news, it even seems to work! But I haven't pushed it yet... Thanks! > The new problem with 4.3.0 is the versioned dependency of xlibs on > xlibs-data. So there is a problem if new tetex or xcursor source is > uploaded between the upload of xlibs-data and xlibs. ...because the arch-independent packages are available from the archive for your architecture before that architecture has built the corresponding arch-specific packages, right? > If, say, MIPS is slow to build xfree86, then tetex/xcursor will be > impossible to autobuild in the meantime, because xlibs-dev will be > impossible to install. And then, if a new X is uploaded before this > is resolved, neither one can be built because neither is installable. I see. > Even worse, autobuilding X becomes totally impossible once xlibs-data is > accepted, because to build it, one must install libxcursor-dev, which > requires installing xlibs, which is not installable because it is old > and xlibs-data is new. So one must have previously installed either > xlibs 4.2.x or else *both* the old xlibs *and* old xlibs-data, then one > can install libxcursor-dev, then one can build the new X. Or one could > have previously installed libxcursor-dev and tetex-bin (which is why I > didn't notice this wrt tetex), but the autobuilders of course have none > of these. I see. > There are two ways to resolve this: break the dependency of libxcursor1 > on xlibs (or change it to "Recommends" or "Suggests"), or soften the > version requirement of the dependency relationship between xlibs and > xlibs-data (e.g. ">= 4.3.0" or even ">=${Source-Version}" will solve > this problem, though it may break in other subtle ways). No, I think the right thing to do is soften the versioned dep on xlibs-data. In fact, the versioning can go away entirely since it did not exist before 4.3.0. Should the data ever change in a way that matters for compatibility, versioning can be added. I'm not sure if it was Daniel Stone or me who decided to make xlibs-data and xlibs upgrade in precise lockstep, but it is starting to look like a mistake. Thanks for the patient explanation. You were describing a situation I was familiar with (I don't have an i386, so on my sparc and powerpc boxen I often see locales and glibc-doc update one day, and the rest glibc the next). I hadn't previously thought about what this can do to -dev packages and autobuilders before. -- G. Branden Robinson | Human beings rarely imagine a god Debian GNU/Linux | that behaves any better than a branden@debian.org | spoiled child. http://people.debian.org/~branden/ | -- Robert Heinlein
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature