On Tue, Sep 13, 2011 at 8:31 PM, Bill Allombert <bill.allomb...@math.u-bordeaux1.fr> wrote: > Symptoms include 'apt-get dist-upgrade' from stable to next-stable trying to > remove a lot of packages by failure to find a better upgrade path, to > maintainer scripts failing because they assume the Dependent package to be > configured.
I see. But I am not convinced that we currently have a real problem that can be reproduced. I must admit that i do not have time to hunt unreproducible bugs. > This also a matter of good taste: it is pointless to provide 3 packages if > the user is forced > to install them all: a single one would do. Most of the time it is caused by a > packaging bug (e.g. a typo in debian/control). The packages can be updated independently. Such a use case is not pointless and is even important because the upstream code is released independently. > Indeed. Given that this circular dependency was introduced yesterday, it > could not have > caused problem with previous upgrade. I do not mind splitting one of those binary packages into two packages as long as we do not have to split the jar files. But I am expecting some proposal from your side. I simply do not know what kind of splitting would resolve the issue. Torsten -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
