On 8/13/20 11:49 AM, Bill Allombert wrote: > On Thu, Aug 13, 2020 at 11:25:21AM +0200, Matthias Klose wrote: >> On 8/12/20 11:16 PM, Bill Allombert wrote: >>> On Thu, May 21, 2020 at 02:15:51PM +0200, Andreas Beckmann wrote: >>>> On 21/05/2020 14.05, Matthias Klose wrote: >>>>> On 5/20/20 10:32 PM, Andreas Beckmann wrote: >>>>>> With the transitional packages gone in 10.1.0-2, please add versioned >>>>>> (epoched!) provides on the old names (as already done in libgcc-s1) >>>>>> in order to keep old packages installable along the latest gcc. >>>>> >>>>> I'd like to avoid that. Please build the nvidia packages using the new >>>>> package >>>>> names. >>>> >>>> This has nothing to do with nvidia. This breaks keeping old compilers >>>> around, which so far worked fine for a long time. >>> >>> Seconded. I have all versions of gcc starting at 4.4 that I would like >>> to keep, but the upgrade require to remove them. >> >> I don't want to do that. What exactly depends on the non-default multilib >> libraries? > > # apt-get dist-upgrade > The following packages will be REMOVED: > g++-4.4-multilib g++-4.5-multilib g++-4.6-multilib g++-4.7-multilib > g++-5-multilib > g++-6-multilib gcc-4.4-multilib gcc-4.5-multilib gcc-4.6-multilib > gcc-4.7-multilib > gcc-5-multilib gcc-6-multilib lib32asan0 lib32asan1 lib32asan2 lib32asan3 > lib32asan4 > lib32cilkrts5 lib32gcc-4.7-dev lib32gcc-4.8-dev lib32gcc-4.9-dev > lib32gcc-5-dev > lib32gcc-6-dev lib32gcc-7-dev lib32gcc1 lib32stdc++-4.9-dev > lib32stdc++-5-dev > lib32stdc++-6-dev lib32stdc++6-4.7-dev lib32ubsan0 > libclang-common-5.0-dev libgc1c2 libgcc1 > libx32asan0 libx32asan1 libx32asan2 libx32asan3 libx32asan4 > libx32cilkrts5 libx32gcc-4.7-dev > libx32gcc-5-dev libx32gcc-6-dev libx32gcc-7-dev libx32gcc1 > libx32stdc++-5-dev > libx32stdc++-6-dev libx32stdc++6-4.7-dev libx32ubsan0
ok, so this is for the multilib compiler packages only. The default multilib is not affected by this change. > libgcc-s1 Provides: libgcc1 (= 1:10-20200418-1) which is OK. > However lib32gcc-s1 does not provides lib32gcc1 (= 1:10-20200418-1) > so packages depending on lib32gcc1 are broken. > > I like to add: I have all these compilers available for test purpose > on my system thanks to your hard work packaging gcc over so many years. > It is really neat. It would be sad to lose all this now. You have those available in i386/x32 chroots as well. Also there are amd64 -> i386 cross compilers for the newer versions. Is it really necessary to keep the non-default multilib builds? Matthias
