Hi Vincent,
Vincent Lefevre wrote:
> > I've seen also already seen this, but so far it always was for a
> > reason here:
> >
> > * On multiarch hosts, amd64 and i386 weren't in sync and there were
> > Breaks against any version not being the same version.
>
> This is not a multiarch host yet.
That was already mentioned in the original bug report's footer, yes.
Otherwise I would have asked. :-)
> > * An initial solution pulls in a package which Breaks the package in
> > question and that pulled in package later (manually or due to other
> > conflicts by manual changes) gets set to "keep uninstalled", but the
> > effect of its Breaks is not reverted.
>
> I cannot see any Breaks of at-spi2-core.
Yes, I've checked that, too.
That's also why I mentioned them: These cases don't apply and hence
it's NOT one of the two common cases, where it's more obvious (albeit
not necessarily good) that this happens.
[I removed the additional details, but they might come in handy later,
so thanks!]
> > But in your case neither of that seems to be case. So it indeed might
> > be a bug in this case.
>
> Do you need the bundle?
Actually that would be interesting, as I have a vague idea how it
might have been triggered and would like to experiment a bit if I can
find a simpler reproducer.
BTW, do I remember right that you have APT::Install-Recommends set
"false"?
Regards, Axel
--
,''`. | Axel Beckert <a...@debian.org>, https://people.debian.org/~abe/
: :' : | Debian Developer, ftp.ch.debian.org Admin
`. `' | 4096R: 2517 B724 C5F6 CA99 5329 6E61 2FF9 CD59 6126 16B5
`- | 1024D: F067 EA27 26B9 C3FC 1486 202E C09E 1D89 9593 0EDE
