Hi Osamu,
I am sorry to have created so much misunderstanding, I will try to keep
indirect statements and implicative assertions out of this email and
write very clear:
* I am Debian Developer. I can fix my computer myself.
See my quote [1] below.
* Concerning severity
Let us make it *veerrryyy* simple. Please answer the following three
questions:
1) A system with only packages from stable and some of the packages
in rc state (removed but not purged), is this system in a valid and
proper state?
2) If you answered yes to 1): Should dist-upgrade from a system in the
state as given in 1) result in a working system?
3) If you answered yes to 2): A bug that breaks the behaviour as outlined
in 2), does it have a release critical severity?
I hope you got it this time.
* Concerning bug assignment:
You stated that *I* should assign it to the respective package
see your quote [2] and [3]
Now *I* don't know how the catalogues are updated, there are at least
three different methods:
- hand written postinst script -> assign to resp package
- dh script creating postinst -> assign to package shipping dh script
- trigger acction -> assign to package doing the trigger action
Now, do you *expect* me to know which is the case?
No, I don't read the sgml-related transition documents, I am not
a maintainer of a sgml related package. You are. And you should know
where a bug belongs. So you should reassign it.
Stated the other way round: In the TeX world we have the very same case.
If a DD not related to TeX sends a bug report to lmodern (font package)
that is actually a bug in tex-common which ships the debhelper script,
then I expect the maintainer of lmodern to assign it to tex-common, the
DD cannot know this, and I a don't expect him to know.
But I expect the maintainer of lmodern as a DD working in this area
to know whom the bug should be assigned to.
Got my point?
* Concerning your closing bugs at will
Here seems to be another few of white spots appearing:
Looking at your quote [4] wondering why there is version 1.1-5 in rc
state while I am running sid, I wonder if you have ever upgraded
a Debian system? Yes, this is normal, my computer started at woody
or even before. State rc is definitely valid state.
Furthermore, you are stating that it is not your bug (quote [5] and [6]).
Even if it is not a bug in your package, it is a bug that causes
your package to break, as *it*still*does* (not on my system, but
easily recreated. Please see the email of Helmut if you don't understand it)
So stating that it is solved for debiandoc-sgml (quote [7]) is wrong.
For the rest of the technical discussion, including suggestions how
to handle it, see my email to Helmut, he has immediately grasped
the problem and the severity of the problem. I think the bug is
in good hands there, better than here.
Regards
Norbert
Quotes:
[1] Norbert
> > Could it be that there is no update running...
> > $ update-catalog --update-super
> > Updating the super catalog...
> > Ahhh and now it is good.
[2] Osamu
> Nobert, I thought I explained background info enough and I thought those
> pointer info made your situation settled. For remaining issues, I was
> expecting you to submit new cleaner bug report to appropriate places.
[3] Osamu
> I think this is clear if you spend time to read associated bug reports.
[4] Osamu
> 1.1-5??? That is from the stable release. I thought you were running
> sid.
[5] Osamu
> Wait, if you know there is problem in w3c-dtd-xhtml, why complaining to
> me. Why asking me to reassign if you know so much? I did clone this
[6] Osamu
> Recreated, YES. But this log indicate clearly that the bug is in
> removal of w3c-dtd-xhtml.
[7] Osamu
> Nobert, I had good reasons to close this bug. Please read your initial
> bug report of yours and see issues you saw. You are not seeing them
> now. That problem has been solved for debiandoc-sgml.
On Di, 19 Jun 2012, Osamu Aoki wrote:
> Nobert, I thought I explained background info enough and I thought those
> pointer info made your situation settled. For remaining issues, I was
> expecting you to submit new cleaner bug report to appropriate places.
> (Clearly this is not a bug of my package.) Since you insist, I will go
> out of my way to help you solve your problem and make reassignment of
> bug report. But quite frankly, second guessing where are the breakages
> in your system is a quite difficult task for me. It is very confusing.
>
> The bug report by Nobert http://bugs.debian.org/477751 raised several
> issues. I summarize remaining bugs as:
> * dh_installcatalogs transition with removed package
> * Broken {post|pre}rm script of w3c-dtd-xhtml
>
> These bugs cause his system to break even now. He still have problem
> using debiandoc-sgml package even after bug #675474 ("debiandoc-sgml:
> please rebuild to fix your copy of #477751", fixed in 1.2.27.)
>
> I cloned this bug as -1 to address w3c-dtd-xhtml issue (For this bug -1
> on w3c-dtd-xhtml, please skip to the half way in this long bug report by
> searching "bug -1". Excuse us for this complication.)
>
> === bug 477751 : dh_installcatalogs transition with removed package ==
>
> Helmut, The closure of dh_installcatalogs bug initiated by the
> http://bugs.debian.org/477751 needed a bit more coordination than what
> has been done so far. I think what Helmut did was great job but
> sometimes we need a final touch. What needs attention is packages which
> are removed between squeeze/wheezy.
>
> I see Nobert having multiple issues. Some are because of broken other
> packages. But as I see his traumatic experience, I am wondering if there
> are some fundamental issues associated with Helmut's dh_installcatalogs
> transition plan with removed package. Helmut suggested us to make
> re-upload using new dh_installcatalogs. What does Helmut anticipated for
> packages such as xml-resume-library which is removed. Their postinst
> script is old. So I assume package removal may not function as expected
> and may create broken catalog. See http://bugs.debian.org/676717 for
> the entire story.
>
> It seems removed xml-resume-library package is one of the cause of
> broken SGML catalog. Since it is not uploaded, I assume it is expected
> to have problem for wheezy if someone upgrade system with such package
> installed.
>
> Reassigning this 676717 bug to debhelper or dpkg is wrong since their
> bugs have been fixed (I understand it was a good ones). I did not assign
> to xml-resume-library since all bugs for removed package are
> automatically closed (or by now, it may not be accepted).
>
> Unless you propose simple technical solution, this is something we
> mention in release note. I initially thought this was unfortunate
> transitional problem in sid only and closed bug but this may affect next
> release. Helmut, please tell me what is the way to handle this bug.
>
> === Some analysis on Nobert's system ==
>
> I will comment on the last report by Nobert as below.
> (Please bare with me.)
>
> On Tue, Jun 19, 2012 at 07:55:02AM +0900, Norbert Preining wrote:
> > reopen 676717
> > thanks
> >
> > Hi Osamu,
> >
> > Funny game, but please stay with me ... if you want to make it short,
> > just read the cowbuilder run down there ...
> >
> > On Mo, 18 Jun 2012, Osamu Aoki wrote:
> > > Please remove or update such broken packages. I guess those may be
> >
> > These packages are removed.
> >
> > > * xml-resume-library (package removed)
> >
> > seems to be a bug in xml-resume-library package or dpkg or whatever,
> > that this package wasn't removed. Furthermore, I checked all my
> > aptitude log files and there is no mentioning of this file, so
> > I am a bit surprised that this file is still here.
> >
> > Anyway, I removed /etc/sgml/xml-resume-library.cat.
>
> Just removing file may not be sufficient. Considering this package
> still using old {post/pre}{inst/rm} scripts, purging may not have been
> done properly considering transition.
>
> > Still no success ... we are left with w3c-dtd-xhtml.cat:
> >
> > > * w3c-dtd-xhtml (package RC bug fixed Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2012)
> >
> > Ok:
> > rc w3c-dtd-xhtml 1.1-5 ....
>
> 1.1-5??? That is from the stable release. I thought you were running
> sid.
> oldstable 1.1-5
> stable 1.1-5
> testing 1.2-3 (uploaded 2012-05-08)
> unstable 1.2-4 (uploaded 2012-06-14)
>
> > Well, then
> > $ aptitude purge w3c-dtd-xhtml
> > ...
> >
> > THat makes it already a bit better, now I get only one error:
> > $ debiandoc2text test.sgml
> > nsgmls:/etc/sgml/catalog:12:8:E: cannot open "/etc/sgml/w3c-dtd-xhtml.cat"
> > (No such file or directory)
> > $
> >
> > Could it be that there is no update running...
> > $ update-catalog --update-super
> > Updating the super catalog...
> > Ahhh and now it is good.
>
> This is something release note needs to mention for upgrading from
> squeeze to wheezy.
>
> > Ok, let us consider this bug closed, but allow me some remarks:
> >
> > > Are you using aptitude command line? Sometimes, aptitude is funny. If
> > > in doubt, please use "apt-get dist-upgrade".
> > >
> > > I do not know why you are not updated w3c-dtd-xhtml to avoid bug.
> >
> > I don't know why *you* are deducing things like:
> > - me using only the command line
> > - me not being fully uptodate although I mentioned it several times
> > that I am using sid and upgraded everything
>
> Oh, "aptitude upgrade" is much more conservative than "apt-get upgrade".
> This causes many package not updated. (I know from my previous vague
> experience thus I always use interactive upgrade with "U" and sort
> through choices wit "<" and ">" to get decent upgrade.) This was my wild
> guess from that memory. Now that I see your w3c-dtd-xhtml is neither
> testing=1.2-3 nor unstable=1.2-4, my wild guess may not have been all
> that wrong. (But this seems a bit more complicated as I see below).
>
> Please note I like aptitude. I was once on the side to use aptitude in
> commandline too. But due to several strange things happened with the
> choice aptitude makes, I was forced to switch my position. You can see
> I move my position shift during squeeze release note description
> discussion.
>
> > > It is easy to miss removed package if you use command line instead of
> > > full console session. So please make sure to remove xml-resume-library.
> >
> > And why you assume that I keep removed packages around.
>
> With full screen, "Obsolete and Locally Created Packages" are listed
> separately with number. So they are very easy to keep eyes on them.
>
> > > Anyway, this is unstable package transition instability issue. This is
> > > not my bug.
> >
> > I keep disagreeing: Here several things have been messed up and
> > this can happen in the very same way when upgrading from stable,
> > why don't you see this problem?
>
> I see this problem happening with your system. It is combination of
> problem caused by
> * recent debhelper change to fix policy violation. (fixed)
> * existed dpkg trigger bug (fixed)
> * associated package rebuild (mostly done but may not be.)
>
> I think this is clear if you spend time to read associated bug reports.
>
> === bug -1 : Broken {post|pre}rm script of w3c-dtd-xhtml ==
>
> Here comes interesting part for w3c-dtd-xhtml.
>
> > If someone has w3c-dtd-xhtml removed but not purged in squeeze,
> > the dist-upgrade (how often you recommend it) will *NOT*HELP*
> > as it leaves the system in a broken state.
> > And how often you close this bug, this bug is *still* present, because
> > I can easily recreate it from stable, see:
>
> Wait, if you know there is problem in w3c-dtd-xhtml, why complaining to
> me. Why asking me to reassign if you know so much? I did clone this
> bug as -1 and reassigned this part of problem to -1. I wish you spend a
> bit more time to make cleaner case to w3c-dtd-xhtml.
>
> > $ cowbuilder --login --basepath /var/cache/pbuilder/stable.cow
> > ...
> > # apt-get install w3c-dtd-xhtml
> > ...
> > # apt-get remove w3c-dtd-xhtml
> > ...
> > # dpkg -l w3c-dtd-xhtml
> > rc w3c-dtd-xhtml 1.1-5 W3C eXtensible HyperText Markup Language
> > (XH
> > # echo "deb http://ftp.nara.wide.ad.jp/debian sid main" >
> > /etc/apt/sources.list
> > # apt-get update
> > ...
> > # apt-get dist-upgrade
> > ...
> > # apt-get install debiandoc-sgml
> > ...
> > # debiandoc2txt test.sgml
> > nsgmls:/etc/sgml/w3c-dtd-xhtml.cat:8:8:E: cannot open
> > "/usr/share/xml/xhtml/schema/dtd/1.0/catalog" (No such file or directory)
> > nsgmls:/etc/sgml/w3c-dtd-xhtml.cat:9:8:E: cannot open
> > "/usr/share/xml/xhtml/schema/dtd/1.1/catalog" (No such file or directory)
> > nsgmls:/etc/sgml/w3c-dtd-xhtml.cat:10:8:E: cannot open
> > "/usr/share/xml/xhtml/schema/dtd/basic/catalog" (No such file or directory)
> > nsgmls:/etc/sgml/w3c-dtd-xhtml.cat:11:8:E: cannot open
> > "/usr/share/xml/xhtml/schema/dtd/catalog" (No such file or directory)
> > nsgmls:/etc/sgml/w3c-dtd-xhtml.cat:12:8:E: cannot open
> > "/usr/share/xml/entities/xhtml/catalog" (No such file or directory)
> > #
> >
> > Bummmmmmmmm
> > Easily recreated by dist-upgrading from stable.
>
> Recreated, YES. But this log indicate clearly that the bug is in
> removal of w3c-dtd-xhtml.
>
> > Please don't close a bug only because you *believe* it is not your
> > bug. Reassign it to the real culprits, but this is a problem that
> > is definitely present, as proven by above cowbuilder example.
>
> Nobert, I had good reasons to close this bug. Please read your initial
> bug report of yours and see issues you saw. You are not seeing them
> now. That problem has been solved for debiandoc-sgml.
>
> You are experiencing other issues. The -1 bug, I reassigned to
> w3c-dtd-xhtml as important. (I was not confident enough on your report
> thus avoided RC bug.) Please understand. If you think this is RC,
> please discuss this with Nicholas.
>
> Another 477751 bug, I am asking Helmut for idea. If no
> suggestion, I will reassign this to release note as wishlist.
>
> Regards,
>
> Osamu
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Norbert Preining preining@{jaist.ac.jp, logic.at, debian.org}
JAIST, Japan TeX Live & Debian Developer
DSA: 0x09C5B094 fp: 14DF 2E6C 0307 BE6D AD76 A9C0 D2BF 4AA3 09C5 B094
------------------------------------------------------------------------
CLOVIS (q.v.)
One who actually looks forward to putting up the Christmas decorations
in the office.
--- Douglas Adams, The Meaning of Liff
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
