Control: tags -1 wontfix Dirk Eddelbuettel: > > On 9 September 2017 at 01:31, Andreas Beckmann wrote: > | On 2017-09-08 22:49, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote: > | > I still maintain that this is a useless "academic" consideration. If > users > | > want to corrupt their systems by only upgrading one package I will not > stop > | > them. They can simply fix them by also upgrading the package left behind. > | > | If the package dependencies are not strict enough and allow known broken > | package combinations to be installed (without any --force switch), it's > | our fault, not the user. > | > | > I aim for 'apt-get dist-upgrade' doing the right thing for them. It will > | > automate this. > | > | Users running testing or sid are much more likely to perform partial > | upgrades. > | Or imagine someone backporting r-base 3.4.1 to stretch ... Breaks will > | really help here. > | > | But let's get back on the topic. > | > | I think a similar example to what you want to achive is #874413 + > | #873791. This is a ABI break in python (some internal module was > | removed), which requires a bunch of binNMUs. In addition to this, there > | were Breaks added in some core python packages (e.g. libpython2.7- > | stdlib) against all the packages that used the removed ABI. > | > | [...] >
Hi, Thanks to Sébastien and Andreas for explaining the issue. > That is madness, and AFAIUI also wrong (as you miss the package which might > have been in the list, but aren't as they may have gotten upgraded by now). > I appreciate that the Breaks-list is fragile; even more so at this scale plus it needs to filter on binNMU versions (which can differ between architectures). However, we will need a solution for the "partial upgrades" issue before r-base can migrate. You may not like the "partial upgrades must work" principle or how it is implemented, but please keep in mind that we (as a distribution and our users) rely on it in many areas to ensure that every thing works as intended. > I do not plan to add this to r-base-core. We already waited five month since > April, what are another seven til the next release of R. > > Dirk > > [...] That is fine. Then (to my knowledge) your only option is an "ABI bump". Until one of these solutions is applied, this bug is "wontfix" and r-base is blocked from migrating to testing. Thanks, ~Niels
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
