On Fri, Apr 20, 2007 at 01:00:53PM +0900, Simon Horman wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 20, 2007 at 05:32:26AM +0900, Masahito Omote wrote:
> > I confirmed this behavior. This happens only when uim-common only is
> > upgradeed and
> > other uim related packages are not upgreaded.
> >
> > This situation only becomes only when you take shotgun approach in
> > upgrading.
> > It does not happen if all uim packages are in archive(In i386 uim cannot be
> > built
> > because of dbus problem. Check
> > http://buildd.debian.org/build.php?&pkg=uim&ver=1%3A1.4.1-2&arch=i386&file=log
> > for more details.).
> >
> > Therefore I close this bug.
>
> Hi Omote-san,
>
> assuming that your shotgun theory is correct, shouldn't the packages
> have relevant dependancies in place? Furthermore, shouldn't the bug be
> reopend pending the addition of such dependancies? I'm currently
> experiencing this problem as part of an apt-get upgrade, which isn't
> really ideal.
I looked a little more closer, and I guess that for
uim-module-manager to execute correctly in the postinst libuim5 needs
to be installed. But because I was doing an aptitude upgrade and
not an aptitude dist-upgrade I still had the older libuim3.
I think that either the postinst needs to be reworked (I don't
even know if that makes sense) or uim-common needs to depend on
libuim5 (= ${binary:Version})
I made a package with this change and after this uim-common was
held-back during an aptitude upgrade, which seems to be correct. When I
subsequently did a aptitude dist-upgrade then all the uim packages
were upgraded without incident.
--
Horms
H: http://www.vergenet.net/~horms/
W: http://www.valinux.co.jp/en/
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
