typo in lib64z1-dev dependency

[Debian Bug Importer]

Automatically imported from Debian bug report #339409 http://bugs.debian.org/339409

[Debian Bug Importer (debzilla)]

Automatically imported from Debian bug report #339409 http://bugs.debian.org/339409

[Debian Bug Importer (debzilla)]

Message-ID: <email address hidden>
Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2005 04:43:40 +0100
From: Matthias Klose <email address hidden>
To: <email address hidden>
Subject: typo in lib64z1-dev dependency

Package: lib64z1-dev
Severity: serious
Version: 1:1.2.3-6

s/lib64c-dev/lib64c6-dev/

[Mark Brown (broonie)]

On Wed, Nov 16, 2005 at 04:43:40AM +0100, Matthias Klose wrote:

> s/lib64c-dev/lib64c6-dev/

The version of glibc in unstable seems to disagree with that one (not
that it matters too much given your subsequent message).

--
"You grabbed my hand and we fell into it, like a daydream - or a fever."

[Debian Bug Importer (debzilla)]

Message-ID: <email address hidden>
Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2005 22:47:35 +0000
From: Mark Brown <email address hidden>
To: Matthias Klose <email address hidden>, <email address hidden>
Subject: Re: Bug#339409: typo in lib64z1-dev dependency

--TakKZr9L6Hm6aLOc
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Wed, Nov 16, 2005 at 04:43:40AM +0100, Matthias Klose wrote:

> s/lib64c-dev/lib64c6-dev/

The version of glibc in unstable seems to disagree with that one (not
that it matters too much given your subsequent message).

--=20
"You grabbed my hand and we fell into it, like a daydream - or a fever."

--TakKZr9L6Hm6aLOc
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
Content-Description: Digital signature
Content-Disposition: inline

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux)

iQCVAwUBQ3u3BQ2erOLNe+68AQIRDwQAksEyw8mmZjL5wXThmHeglbaeBPnYu75l
K3JiVf/iKYB8m1Io9c288yQpRnd9lfo2Yd79wqmxTEbHEWK/IvXCXJ6AgfHQZ/xj
HdxyCVWPpsArtzPq1dW/z40Vg4h3LhUuGWb/k8P5WiLoPLS6f1PpM0hUo+ZNhhYv
JhY47njGXIY=
=J/hC
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--TakKZr9L6Hm6aLOc--

[Mark Brown (broonie)]

tag 339409 + moreinfo

[Mark Brown (broonie)]

On Wed, Nov 16, 2005 at 04:43:40AM +0100, Matthias Klose wrote:

> Package: lib64z1-dev
> Severity: serious
> Version: 1:1.2.3-6

> s/lib64c-dev/lib64c6-dev/

Could you clarify what the problem you're reporting here is, please? As
far as I can tell the current packages are installable with just the
lib64c-dev dependency:

| $ sudo apt-get install lib64z1-dev
| Reading package lists... Done
| Building dependency tree... Done
| The following extra packages will be installed:
| libc6-dev-ppc64
| The following NEW packages will be installed:
| lib64z1-dev libc6-dev-ppc64
| 0 upgraded, 2 newly installed, 0 to remove and 1 not upgraded.
| Need to get 59.4kB/2049kB of archives.
| After unpacking 7758kB of additional disk space will be used.
| Do you want to continue [Y/n]?

and glibc does have the packages provide lib64c-dev (I have 2.3.5-8 here).

--
"You grabbed my hand and we fell into it, like a daydream - or a fever."

[Debian Bug Importer (debzilla)]

Message-Id: <20051117223049.C0FE0FA8F0@raphaela>
Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2005 22:30:49 +0000 (GMT)
From: <email address hidden> (Mark Brown)
To: <email address hidden>
Subject:

tag 339409 + moreinfo

[Debian Bug Importer (debzilla)]

Message-ID: <email address hidden>
Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2005 22:32:39 +0000
From: Mark Brown <email address hidden>
To: Matthias Klose <email address hidden>, <email address hidden>
Subject: Re: Bug#339409: typo in lib64z1-dev dependency

--OXfL5xGRrasGEqWY
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Wed, Nov 16, 2005 at 04:43:40AM +0100, Matthias Klose wrote:

> Package: lib64z1-dev
> Severity: serious
> Version: 1:1.2.3-6

> s/lib64c-dev/lib64c6-dev/

Could you clarify what the problem you're reporting here is, please? As
far as I can tell the current packages are installable with just the
lib64c-dev dependency:

| $ sudo apt-get install lib64z1-dev
| Reading package lists... Done
| Building dependency tree... Done
| The following extra packages will be installed:
| libc6-dev-ppc64
| The following NEW packages will be installed:
| lib64z1-dev libc6-dev-ppc64
| 0 upgraded, 2 newly installed, 0 to remove and 1 not upgraded.
| Need to get 59.4kB/2049kB of archives.
| After unpacking 7758kB of additional disk space will be used.
| Do you want to continue [Y/n]?

and glibc does have the packages provide lib64c-dev (I have 2.3.5-8 here).

--=20
"You grabbed my hand and we fell into it, like a daydream - or a fever."

--OXfL5xGRrasGEqWY
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
Content-Description: Digital signature
Content-Disposition: inline

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux)

iQCVAwUBQ30FAw2erOLNe+68AQJzfQP+OAj7icrz2MxYRxTkH6wl3yp08FOec1zv
Ne8/CVyreWtWr/TvdacnMazF812zWC7OiyNqBSbjvFoRE8aFJX5zEN6wd7/jM/bq
WqZDZ4Sla5rKQmZITKCEy1leNArvEnCYU+juG+sn0anTBjOoKiBe6eBe9HP0YjCD
Bz53whXK4WY=
=O4oK
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--OXfL5xGRrasGEqWY--

[Mark Brown (broonie)]

On Wed, Nov 16, 2005 at 04:43:40AM +0100, Matthias Klose wrote:

> s/lib64c-dev/lib64c6-dev/

As far as I can tell there is no actual bug here: the lib64c-dev
provides exists in unstable and the dependency appears to do what I was
expecting it to do.

--
"You grabbed my hand and we fell into it, like a daydream - or a fever."

[Debian Bug Importer (debzilla)]

Message-ID: <email address hidden>
Date: Sat, 19 Nov 2005 13:02:17 +0000
From: Mark Brown <email address hidden>
To: <email address hidden>
Subject: Re: Bug#339409: typo in lib64z1-dev dependency

--pf9I7BMVVzbSWLtt
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Wed, Nov 16, 2005 at 04:43:40AM +0100, Matthias Klose wrote:

> s/lib64c-dev/lib64c6-dev/

As far as I can tell there is no actual bug here: the lib64c-dev
provides exists in unstable and the dependency appears to do what I was
expecting it to do.

--=20
"You grabbed my hand and we fell into it, like a daydream - or a fever."

--pf9I7BMVVzbSWLtt
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
Content-Description: Digital signature
Content-Disposition: inline

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux)

iQCVAwUBQ38iVg2erOLNe+68AQLXiQP+KF0xONYE6+vUTl3EGWljJ6/IBRLH8wT6
6BADE755GdEGuW7SahrjEhdAFkyze5rAJFQYx+7N0ovsjlPQ1jxH5azMrKZH5yay
NrdDEhU1W5v14BGxvW/jHlih4vIEJL3/GsKTdcHZ5lDocoZwnALDzgphGJxeaK/M
N8eqvARtHP4=
=yCLr
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--pf9I7BMVVzbSWLtt--

[Matthias Klose (doko-cs)]

Debian Bug Tracking System writes:
> As far as I can tell there is no actual bug here: the lib64c-dev
> provides exists in unstable and the dependency appears to do what I was
> expecting it to do.

yes, but you are required to depend on a real package as well, not
just only on a virtual package.

[Debian Bug Importer (debzilla)]

Message-ID: <email address hidden>
Date: Sat, 19 Nov 2005 14:34:57 +0100
From: Matthias Klose <email address hidden>
To: <email address hidden>
Subject: Re: Bug#339409 acknowledged by developer (Re: Bug#339409: typo in lib64z1-dev dependency)

Debian Bug Tracking System writes:
> As far as I can tell there is no actual bug here: the lib64c-dev
> provides exists in unstable and the dependency appears to do what I was
> expecting it to do.

yes, but you are required to depend on a real package as well, not
just only on a virtual package.

[Stephen Gran (sgran)]

This one time, at band camp, Matthias Klose said:
> Debian Bug Tracking System writes:
> > As far as I can tell there is no actual bug here: the lib64c-dev
> > provides exists in unstable and the dependency appears to do what I was
> > expecting it to do.
>
> yes, but you are required to depend on a real package as well, not
> just only on a virtual package.

I sort of diagree here. AIUI, the reason for the rule to depend on
real || virtual is to have consistent behavior when doing automated
packaging work - the autobuilders will install the same package from a
given pool of choices and so on. This is to cover things like awk, which
is provided by gawk, mawk, etc. This is not that sort of situation -
if I read things right, there is only one package on each architecture
providing this virtual package - the virtual package is only there
to provide an easy way to get that functionality across architectures
without hard-coding all of the architectures individually.

If there were more than one package per architecture providing this
virtual package, then the dependency would need to be adjusted to
provide consistent behavior. But at first blush, we don't seem to be
there.

But I may be missing something. I'm willing ot be convinced, but this
seems like one of those corner cases where following policy to the letter
is actually less helpful than the current arrangement.
--
 -----------------------------------------------------------------
| ,''`. Stephen Gran |
| : :' : <email address hidden> |
| `. `' Debian user, admin, and developer |
| `- http://www.debian.org |
 -----------------------------------------------------------------

[Debian Bug Importer (debzilla)]

Message-ID: <email address hidden>
Date: Sat, 19 Nov 2005 15:20:20 +0000
From: Stephen Gran <email address hidden>
To: Matthias Klose <email address hidden>, <email address hidden>
Subject: Re: Bug#339409: acknowledged by developer (Re: Bug#339409: typo in lib64z1-dev dependency)

--FL5UXtIhxfXey3p5
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

This one time, at band camp, Matthias Klose said:
> Debian Bug Tracking System writes:
> > As far as I can tell there is no actual bug here: the lib64c-dev
> > provides exists in unstable and the dependency appears to do what I was
> > expecting it to do.
>=20
> yes, but you are required to depend on a real package as well, not
> just only on a virtual package.

I sort of diagree here. AIUI, the reason for the rule to depend on
real || virtual is to have consistent behavior when doing automated
packaging work - the autobuilders will install the same package from a
given pool of choices and so on. This is to cover things like awk, which
is provided by gawk, mawk, etc. This is not that sort of situation -
if I read things right, there is only one package on each architecture
providing this virtual package - the virtual package is only there
to provide an easy way to get that functionality across architectures
without hard-coding all of the architectures individually.

If there were more than one package per architecture providing this
virtual package, then the dependency would need to be adjusted to
provide consistent behavior. But at first blush, we don't seem to be
there.

But I may be missing something. I'm willing ot be convinced, but this
seems like one of those corner cases where following policy to the letter
is actually less helpful than the current arrangement.
--=20
 -----------------------------------------------------------------
| ,''`. Stephen Gran |
| : :' : <email address hidden> |
| `. `' Debian user, admin, and developer |
| `- http://www.debian.org |
 -----------------------------------------------------------------

--FL5UXtIhxfXey3p5
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
Content-Description: Digital signature
Content-Disposition: inline

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFDf0K0SYIMHOpZA44RAuf5AKCt8CUQflwrK04mXCbUG6858vX7VMJACfd48+
ChIjXKnxCXujGwnu4YbQydk=
=FSyt
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--FL5UXtIhxfXey3p5--

[Mark Brown (broonie)]

On Sat, Nov 19, 2005 at 03:20:20PM +0000, Stephen Gran wrote:

> If there were more than one package per architecture providing this
> virtual package, then the dependency would need to be adjusted to
> provide consistent behavior. But at first blush, we don't seem to be
> there.

Yes, that's pretty much it - the real package is only needed to avoid
tools like apt getting upset if they have to make a decision about what
to install. If there is only one possible option this doesn't apply
(which is why you can use Provides: when renaming a package).

--
"You grabbed my hand and we fell into it, like a daydream - or a fever."

[Debian Bug Importer (debzilla)]

Message-ID: <email address hidden>
Date: Sat, 19 Nov 2005 19:11:59 +0000
From: Mark Brown <email address hidden>
To: Stephen Gran <email address hidden>, <email address hidden>
Cc: Matthias Klose <email address hidden>
Subject: Re: Bug#339409: acknowledged by developer (Re: Bug#339409: typo in lib64z1-dev dependency)

--hHWLQfXTYDoKhP50
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Sat, Nov 19, 2005 at 03:20:20PM +0000, Stephen Gran wrote:

> If there were more than one package per architecture providing this
> virtual package, then the dependency would need to be adjusted to
> provide consistent behavior. But at first blush, we don't seem to be
> there.

Yes, that's pretty much it - the real package is only needed to avoid
tools like apt getting upset if they have to make a decision about what
to install. If there is only one possible option this doesn't apply
(which is why you can use Provides: when renaming a package).

--=20
"You grabbed my hand and we fell into it, like a daydream - or a fever."

--hHWLQfXTYDoKhP50
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
Content-Description: Digital signature
Content-Disposition: inline

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux)

iQCVAwUBQ394+g2erOLNe+68AQIZcwP/SmkMVqa303q/n++sJcOfnAp5R37kz0sh
+/1sA2Vf4Tpxr+graS00tZVe3u/Of/9nGD3YmF0XwXnGg2wyMLdnAlspLdRzJ/7T
zZlWGnD9kpz8YVeh616zjAI4RjFL3k/H8VXWSyjNOewktsMNCtYfzZsJFVgMMSUO
ZnnxqlogjxE=
=5j6E
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--hHWLQfXTYDoKhP50--

[Matthias Klose (doko)]

not a bug