unblock 363294 with 356694 thanks On 2006-05-08 Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Mon, May 08, 2006 at 04:23:47PM +0200, Andreas Metzler wrote: >> On 2006-05-07 Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> On Sat, May 06, 2006 at 06:41:42PM +0200, Andreas Metzler wrote: >>>> On 2006-04-18 Bastian Blank <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>>>> Package: gnutls13 >>>>> Version: 1.3.5 >>>>> Severity: grave
>>>>> A rebuild of gnutls13 looses its dependency against libtasn1 and uses a >>>>> staticaly linked version instead. >> [...] >>>> This is not fixable until libtasn >= 0.3.1 is uploaded, which will >>>> need to go through the NEW queue as the soname has changed. >>> Not necessarily. gnutls13 does build in the absence of libtasn-dev, it just >>> builds *differently* depending on whether libtasn1-3 is available: it uses >>> its bundled tasn instead. >> Eh. The whole bug report by Bastian basically just says: "It does not >> link against a externelly packages version of libtasn but statically >> against the included one." And this, .... > Actually, the title of the bug report is "rebuild loses dep against > libtasn1", which is very much about whether the build-dependencies are > correct. Hello, it depends on whether you read it as "is not linked against external libtasn anymore" or as "depending on installed version of libtasn1-2-dev will be linked against external version or internal version". I read it in the former interpretation, which is only fixable by upoading libtasn1-3. >>> As long as there is no libtasn1-3 in the archive, >>> this should be ok (not great, but ok) -- so a reasonable solution might be >>> to drop the build-dependency on libtasn1-2-dev and instead build-conflict >>> with any libtasn dev packages that it could accidentally build against. >>> Then when there's a -dev package for libtasn1-3, it should be re-added as a >>> build-dependency. >> ... would not change what Bastian reported in *any* way. >> Removing the libtasn1-2 build-dependecy fixes the whishlist bug >> "lists pacages i build-depends that it does not use at all". Adding a >> build-conflict against libtasn1-2-dev seems to be useless > It's not useless. The libtasn1-2-dev 0.3 that was briefly in the archive is > what the gnutls13 packages on i386 and s390 got built against. While this > package will no longer be found on any of the buildds, in the interest of > preventing accidental misbuilds on developer systems the build-conflict > ought to be added. I see. I completely agree that gnutls13 should prevent building against this broken version. > Limiting the build-conflict to the specific broken version of libtasn1-2-dev > should be fine, if you want to take that approach. It seems to be cleaner to me. [...] >> As noted above I fail to see much of the necessity of the changes you >> propose and none of them changes "gnutls13 is linked statically >> against libtasn". - If you consider "gnutls13 is linked statically" to >> not be grave just downgrade this bug. > Wrong build-dependencies/build-conflicts are a serious bug. [...] Only if they can cause breakage imho, as you've shown above breakage is possible. I missed that (corner case), thanks. cu andreas -- The 'Galactic Cleaning' policy undertaken by Emperor Zhark is a personal vision of the emperor's, and its inclusion in this work does not constitute tacit approval by the author or the publisher for any such projects, howsoever undertaken. (c) Jasper Ffforde -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
