Hi, (Initially a mail/question to the X team as I wasn't entirely sure, but the more I look at it, the more it looks like a serious bug in src:libx11, nothing else.)
Spotted via dose's reporting lots of uninstallable udebs on arm64: I'm not sure new shlibs for libx11-6 are correct, with various libx* packages now depending on libx11-xcb1 (not a udeb). https://d-i.debian.org/dose/graph-unstable-arm64.png The new debian/rules has: override_dh_makeshlibs: dh_makeshlibs -a -plibx11-6 -V'libx11-6 (>= 2:1.6.0)' --add-udeb=libx11-6-udeb -- -c4 dh_makeshlibs -a -plibx11-xcb1 -V'libx11-xcb1' -- -c4 dh_makeshlibs -a -Nlibx11-6 -Nlibx11-xcb1 -- -c4 which leads to the following for libx11-6.shlibs (amd64): libX11 6 libx11-xcb1 udeb: libX11 6 libx11-xcb1 Meanwhile, libx11-xcb1 has: libX11-xcb 1 libx11-xcb1 which seems to match the intent in changelog. Out of curiosity, pausing the build after the first dh_makeshlibs call, the shlibs for libx11-6 is indeed correct: libX11 6 libx11-6 (>= 2:1.6.0) udeb: libX11 6 libx11-6-udeb (>= 2:1.6.0) and the second one is responsible for busting it up, since afterwards it's amended to become what's found in the package: libX11 6 libx11-xcb1 udeb: libX11 6 libx11-xcb1 So it looks like some confusion due to the -a/-p/-N combinations? Going back to pausing between first and second dh_makeshlibs calls, here's the slibs file for libx11-xcb1… libX11-xcb 1 libx11-6 (>= 2:1.6.0) udeb: libX11-xcb 1 libx11-6 (>= 2:1.6.0) which convinces me the flag combinations aren't fine as they are. Cheers, -- Cyril Brulebois (k...@debian.org) <https://debamax.com/> D-I release manager -- Release team member -- Freelance Consultant
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
