[buildd-tools-devel] Bug#596516: Bug#596516: Bug#596516: emacs22 binnmu causes internal error

Roger Leigh rleigh at codelibre.net
Mon Nov 1 20:38:11 UTC 2010


merge 595934 596516
thanks

On Sun, Sep 12, 2010 at 12:44:41PM +0200, Philipp Kern wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 12, 2010 at 12:59:57PM +0300, Riku Voipio wrote:
> > sbuild has trouble handling the emacs22 binnmu. later apt-get chokes too.
> 
> I don't know if deps on virtual packages without providing a non-virtual
> alternative first worked in the past.  It looks like this is now broken,
> at least.  Do we want that to be working?  (With the default dependency
> resolution algorithm.  I presume the aptitude one is not affected.)
> 
> That sbuild explodes in such an amazing way is another bug to tackle,
> though.

The hairy parsing of the apt-get output to find potential virtual
package candidates is responsible.  However, it was totally
broken.

After discussion on IRC, we've removed support for resolving
virtual package installation by repeated apt-get invocation
(it repeats until it no longer fails due to unsatisfied
virtual packages are found).  Using a static list of
virtual->real packages was also rather broken.

If we are to support proper installation of virtual packages,
we should really just use the aptitude resolver.  I could
implement it properly for the "internal" resolver, but I
would have to say that it would be really slow (reading the
entire "apt-cache show '.*'" output, parsing it, storing the
entire virtual package list in a hash, including dealing with
multiple provides of the same virtual package.  It's also a
good deal of work to write and debug.  Given that the
aptitude resolver already does all this, I'm not sure it's
worth doing.

Actually, we could run "apt-cache search --names-only $virtual",
for each dependency, which would have a lower overhead than
processing the entire database.  Doing it in run_apt like the
old code was doing in wrong though--this should be done in the
core dependency resolver so virtual packages never get passed to
apt-get.


Regards,
Roger

-- 
  .''`.  Roger Leigh
 : :' :  Debian GNU/Linux             http://people.debian.org/~rleigh/
 `. `'   Printing on GNU/Linux?       http://gutenprint.sourceforge.net/
   `-    GPG Public Key: 0x25BFB848   Please GPG sign your mail.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/buildd-tools-devel/attachments/20101101/89fbb181/attachment.pgp>


More information about the Buildd-tools-devel mailing list