On Sat, Jun 26, 2010 at 12:14:31AM +0200, Bernd Zeimetz wrote: > On 06/25/2010 11:49 PM, Kurt Roeckx wrote: > > On Fri, Jun 25, 2010 at 10:51:05PM +0200, Bernd Zeimetz wrote: > >> Hi, > >> > >> are there any news on this bug? I've been hit by it today again, which is > >> really > >> anoying as I have to build and use atlas now instead of the small libblas > >> as it > >> is not possible for me to build-conflict on A and build-depend on B in > >> this case. > > > > I'm not sure what you're trying to do here. If you think it > > should get build with A on the buildds, you should use A | B. > > If you think B should be used, you should use B | A. > > > > This makes sure that you actually get reproducible behaviour and > > that the buildd doesn't pick A or B randomly. > > No, you understood me wrong. > I build-depend on liblapack-dev, which depends on > libatlas-base-dev | libblas-dev | libblas-3gf.so > But I want to avoid to build with libatlas-base-dev as libblas-dev is more > than > enough in this case (and I need to build-depend on it anyway). > So it should be safe to build-conflict against libatlas-base-dev as all > dependencies are solved - this works well in pbuilder, but sbuild still fails > to > solve that.
build-conflict and sbuild never really work as intended, and that's one of the more annoying things. Did you try adding libblas-dev in the depends list before liblapack-dev? Kurt -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
