On Mon, Feb 12, 2007 at 05:42:31PM -0800, Steve Langasek wrote: > On Mon, Feb 12, 2007 at 06:53:53PM +0100, Bill Allombert wrote: > > Package: upgrade-reports > > Severity: serious > > > The piuparts run below: > > > /usr/sbin/piuparts -a -d sarge -d etch gnupg xawtv k3d-dev libcnumx0-dev > > mozilla-opensc xmms-coverviewer makeself koffice-i18n-nn kview > > libmcardplugin gij-3.4 gimp-dimage-color libast2-dev libaal-dev caudium-dev > > libcvsservice0 tex-guy linuxdoc-tools-latex snort-common multipath-tools > > isic libpam-pwdfile libotr1-dev libglib2-ruby haskelldb-bin cyrus21-imapd > > bsign scalapack-lam-test pyching freeswan dict-freedict-spa-eng xfaces > > libtie-cache-perl zope2.7-mimetypesregistry libdmsocket-0.32.5-0-dev > > attal-themes-medieval kde-i18n-srlatin dircproxy pica glimmer kappfinder > > kde-i18n-eu 9menu selflinux-pdf libgtksourceview-doc > > Is there a smaller minimal set of packages that can be used to reproduce the > problem? Try this one:
k3d-dev kview libaal-dev caudium-dev libcvsservice0 snort-common libpam-pwdfile cyrus21-imapd zope2.7-mimetypesregistry > This looks like an apt bug to me (and isn't the first time I've seen it). Any pointer ? > If we know zope2.7 is going to be removed in addition to python2.3, why is > zope2.7 not removed first, avoiding the need to --force-depends? > > Does piuparts use apt-get or aptitude in its upgrade test, and does that > make a difference in the outcome? piuparts use apt-get. I did not try aptitude. Cheers, -- Bill. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Imagine a large blue swirl here. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
