#595139 apt: multiarch installation chokes on binNMUs

Package:
apt
Source:
apt
Description:
commandline package manager
Submitter:
Simon Richter
Date:
2010-09-08 09:00:03 UTC
Severity:
minor
#595139#5
Date:
2010-09-01 10:14:21 UTC
From:
To:
Hi,

when trying to install a multiarch package that has been binNMUed on one
architecture, apt complains about being unable to resolve the implicit
conflicts, as the version number is not the same across all
architectures.

   Simon
#595139#10
Date:
2010-09-02 12:42:35 UTC
From:
To:
Hello (again) Simon Richter,

2010/9/1 Simon Richter <sjr@debian.org>:

This is really a problem…
but not only here but in general as at least changelog.Debian.gz will differ
(a bit) and can therefore not be shared between the installed packages.
So, i guess it is a bug in the MultiarchSpec [0]. (cc'ing Steve Langasek)

source:Version is a problem as the source version is not always the same
version as the one the binary rebuild is based on - e.g. comerr-dev
(bad example, but the first i found) which would have in a binary rebuild
e.g. version 2.1-1.41.12-2+b1 while source is e2fsprogs (1.41.12-2)…


Best regards

David Kalnischkies

[0] https://wiki.ubuntu.com/MultiarchSpec#Architecture-independent%20files%20in%20multiarch%20packages
#595139#15
Date:
2010-09-02 15:59:50 UTC
From:
To:
Multi-Arch: same packages *must* be kept in version lockstep across
architectures, which means that binNMUs will be of reduced value for such
packages.

Neither multiarch support nor binNMU support is a hard requirement for
packages in the archive.  We will probably have to set some rules in policy
about what the expected behavior is going forward, and we may want to tune
the binNMU implementation in wanna-build to be more friendly to multiarch
(or at least to fail gracefully); but ultimately there will be some use
cases that just don't work anymore via binNMU, and it may be more
straightforward to use sourceful NMUs for these packages.
#595139#20
Date:
2010-09-02 16:41:20 UTC
From:
To:
tag 595139 wontfix
thanks

2010/9/2 Steve Langasek <vorlon@debian.org>:

Thanks for the explanation Steve Langasek!

The behavior of APT is therefore intended and i add wontfix
in the hope that others might see this bug before reporting it again.
Adding this conflict between multiarch and bin-uploads to the Spec
would be a worthy addition, too, i guess (or is it written somewhere
and i just missed it?)


Best regards

David Kalnischkies
#595139#27
Date:
2010-09-02 16:41:20 UTC
From:
To:
tag 595139 wontfix
thanks

2010/9/2 Steve Langasek <vorlon@debian.org>:

Thanks for the explanation Steve Langasek!

The behavior of APT is therefore intended and i add wontfix
in the hope that others might see this bug before reporting it again.
Adding this conflict between multiarch and bin-uploads to the Spec
would be a worthy addition, too, i guess (or is it written somewhere
and i just missed it?)


Best regards

David Kalnischkies
#595139#32
Date:
2010-09-03 07:36:36 UTC
From:
To:
Hi,

I've added it.

   Simon
#595139#37
Date:
2010-09-08 08:55:54 UTC
From:
To:
Steve Langasek <vorlon@debian.org> writes:

Given that multiarch packages should also be usable for cross-compile
that means that any binNMU will have to rebuild ALL architectures of a
package. No more binNMUs for just one or two archs or the packges will
be uninstallable with the version skews.

MfG
        Goswin