On Sat, 01 Nov 2014 05:15:27 +0100 Andreas Beckmann <a...@debian.org> wrote: > Package: firehol-doc > Version: 2.0.0+ds-1 > Severity: serious > User: debian...@lists.debian.org > Usertags: piuparts > > Hi, > > during a test with piuparts I noticed your package fails to upgrade from > 'testing'. > It installed fine in 'testing', then the upgrade to 'sid' fails > because it tries to overwrite other packages files without declaring a > Breaks+Replaces relation. > > See policy 7.6 at > http://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-relationships.html#s-replaces > > >From the attached log (scroll to the bottom...): > > Selecting previously unselected package firehol-doc. > Preparing to unpack .../firehol-doc_2.0.0+ds-1_all.deb ... > Unpacking firehol-doc (2.0.0+ds-1) ... > dpkg: error processing archive > /var/cache/apt/archives/firehol-doc_2.0.0+ds-1_all.deb (--unpack): > trying to overwrite '/usr/share/doc-base/firehol', which is also in > package firehol 1.297-1 > Errors were encountered while processing: > /var/cache/apt/archives/firehol-doc_2.0.0+ds-1_all.deb
Hi Andreas, I'm just curious about what piuparts is doing here. The only way I can get the upgrade to fail is if I install firehol-doc_2.0.0+ds-1 *before* upgrading firehol to 2.0.0+ds-1. But there's not even a firehol-doc package in jessie, so either the package manager or the user would have to insist on installing the new firehol-doc package before upgrading firehol. It seems like the upgrade would handle getting the new firehol onto the system, at which point the -doc package installs correctly. Jerome has already prepared an update that declares Breaks+Replaces that can be uploaded, but it seems like this only protects against a somewhat contrived case that a user is extremely unlikely to encounter. Thank you, tony
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
