On Wed, May 18, 2005 at 09:25:32PM +0200, Lo�c Minier wrote: > Hi Bill,
Hi Lo�c, > On Tue, May 17, 2005, Bill Allombert wrote: > > libpango1.0-0 depends on libpango1.0-common and libpango1.0-common > > depends on libpango1.0-0. This is a circular dependency and cause > > problem during woody to sarge upgrade. > > On Wed, May 18, 2005, Bill Allombert wrote: > > libgtk2.0-0 and libgtk2.0-common have a circular dependency. > > This can cause problems when upgrading to sarge: > > Thanks for your reports, sadly, this is a known problem with the way > apt-get calls dpkg, and has nothing to do with pango or gtk themselves. I beg to differ. > The following D-D thread explains in some depth the root cause: > <http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2005/01/msg01784.html> > ... and suggests to document the problem in the RELEASE NOTES with the > workaround of upgrading apt-get first. > This was even already reported against gtk, in #296175, and I won't > argue that circular depends are perfectly valid: the fact is it plainly > sucks that people have to be bitten by such problems during an upgrade. > > I hope we will find a way to work around this apt-get bug, but any > dependency change is scaring so close to a release. The current documented way to upgrade is to use 'aptitude dist-upgrade' which give much better results than apt-get. I agree changing dependencies for sarge might not an option, though this was done for gnome-applets (See #309341). However, the dpkg behaviour documented by Debian policy section 7.2 does not allow packages with circular dependencies to be installed _at all_. This means that each of them is a potential upgrade breakage, so we should strive to reduce them. Cheers, -- Bill. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Imagine a large red swirl here. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
