On 10/03/18 16:05, Matteo F. Vescovi wrote: > Hi Emilio! > > On 2018-03-10 at 10:27 (+0100), Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote: > > [...] > >>> ### Dependency level 3 ### >>> * gmic_1.7.9+zart-4 => FTBFS (not openexr related) >>> * gst-plugins-bad1.0_1.8.3-1 => FTBFS (not openexr related) >> >> unstable has gst-plugins-bad1.0 1.12.4-2. >> Did you really check with 1.8.3-1? > > Gosh, reverse-depends from ubuntu-dev-tools package brought that version > in my list, no idea why. Anyway, I've checked gst-plugins-bad1.0 > 1.12.4-2 and: > > * gst-plugins-bad1.0 1.12.4-2 => OK
Ok, good. > >> Can you also check the other packages that failed to build (gmic and >> vips)? > > Unfortunately, both were built on the right versions and they fail; gmic > with: > > = = = = = = = >8 = = = = = = > dh_install: Cannot find (any matches for) "etc/bash_completion.d/gmic" > (tried in ., debian/tmp) > > dh_install: gmic missing files: etc/bash_completion.d/gmic > dh_install: missing files, aborting > = = = = = = = >8 = = = = = = That's #892123. > while vips on some weird missing dependencies where openexr is not > involved, it seems. Can you file a bug for this? BTW I see in your changelog: openexr (2.2.1-2) experimental; urgency=medium * debian/: SONAME bump 22 -> 23 * debian/control: add Breaks and Replaces for library replacement So IIUC, you upgraded 2.2.1-1, which bumped the SONAME, without bumping the binary package name. Then you uploaded 2.2.1-2 with updated package name for the bumped SONAME. However since both libopenexr22_2.2.1-1 and libopenexr23_2.2.1-2 ship libopenexr.so.23, you had to add some Breaks/Replaces. But you added: Package: libopenexr23 Version: 2.2.1-2 Replaces: libopenexr22 (<< 2.2.1-2) Breaks: libopenexr22 (<< 2.2.1-2) That's unnecessarily broad, as it breaks against libopenexr22_2.2.0-11.1 that we have in testing, when it shouldn't. That will cause pain during the transition. Can you instead update the Breaks/Replaces to something like libopenexr22 (= 2.2.1-1) or libopenexr22 (>= 2.2.1) That should still conflict against the bad versions but not against the good ones. Basically if you can install libopenexr22/testing with libopenexr23, then we're good to go. Cheers, Emilio
