[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Bug#915027: libxft-dev should be installable for multiple architectures simultaneously



To be completely transparent, I did this on Ubuntu 16.04, but the package has not been changed significantly that I can see.  So, that's odd

I got the error when running "apt-get install libxft-dev:i386 libxft-dev:amd64" which gives the conflict error.  If I run "dpkg -i libxft-dev_2.3.2-1_amd64.deb libxft-dev_2.3.2-1_i386.deb" it will look like it installs both, but the install of i386 silently replaces the amd64, and running a dpkg --list would show only i386 as installed.

That's probably basic for you, but that is what I am seeing. Does that information change anything in your testing?


On 11/29/2018 11:08 AM, Sven Joachim wrote:
Control: tags -1 unreproducible

On 2018-11-29 10:16 -0600, Davy Durham wrote:

Package: libxft-dev
Version: 2.3.2-2

Attempting to install libxft-dev for amd64 and i386 at the same time
(or any other arch for that matter) gives an error that they
conflict.
Not for me, I can coinstall libxft-dev:amd64 and libxft-dev:i386 just
fine.

This is because the "Package: libxft-dev"section of the
debian/control file does not contain "Multi-arch: same" (see
https://wiki.debian.org/MultiArch/Hints#set_Multi-Arch:_same)which
says that any duplicate files between the two different architectures
is fine.
That's already the case:

,----
| $ aptitude show libxft-dev | grep -E Multi-Arch
| Multi-Arch: same
`----

P.S. The same bug could be filed for libxi-dev, libxtst-dev, (these
two also affect me) and probably many of the other x dev packages.
Let me know if you want me to file separate bug reports for those.
Most definitely not, libxi-dev and libxtst-dev are also already
"Multi-Arch: same".

My hunch is that you are running unstable and there might be a version
skew for some dependency package (libc6-dev, maybe?) which prevents you
from installing both libxft-dev:amd64 and libxft-dev:i386.  If that is
the case, please retry after the next mirror push.

Cheers,
        Sven


Reply to: