tag 595876 = confirmed thanks On Sun, 19 Sep 2010 22:15:36 +0200, Justus Winter wrote:
> > Sory for not cc'ing you in my last reply; can you reproduce this bug? > Yes, I just rechecked and it fails on both my i386 and my x86_64 > squeeze installations with the install-info package removed. Interesting. Ah, now I see that I have install-info installed in my sid cowbuilder chroot. > > (And if you can: the fix would be to put > > "dpkg (>= 1.15.4) | install-info" > > into the build-deps > As I understand this, it means dpkg (>= 1.15.4) *or* install-info, > right? The version of dpkg that is installed on my systems fulfills > this requirement yet the package failed to build. Shouldn't the package > build depend on both packages instead of either of them? $ lintian-info -t missing-dependency-on-install-info N: missing-dependency-on-install-info N: N: This package appears to contain at least one info document but does N: not depend on dpkg (>= 1.15.4) | install-info as recommended by N: Policy. This dependency is needed for the transition to triggerized N: install-info to correctly build the info directory during partial N: upgrades from lenny. N: N: Refer to Debian Policy Manual section 12.2 (Info documents) for N: details. N: N: Severity: normal, Certainty: possible N: BTW: the package already has "Depends: dpkg (>= 1.15.4) | install-info" :) And I confused Depends and Build-Depends-Indep in my quick mail, sorry. So, why do I have install-info in my chroot? I guess that's why: belanna:/# apt-get remove install-info Reading package lists... Done Building dependency tree Reading state information... Done The following packages will be REMOVED: info install-info WARNING: The following essential packages will be removed. This should NOT be done unless you know exactly what you are doing! install-info (due to grep) 0 upgraded, 0 newly installed, 2 to remove and 0 not upgraded. After this operation, 659kB disk space will be freed. You are about to do something potentially harmful. To continue type in the phrase 'Yes, do as I say!' > And the info package depends on it. I'd argue, that the multiboot > package should depend on the virtual package info-browser instead of > the install-info package. > Or the dependency on anything info related could be eliminated since > the multiboot package also contains the information in html format so it > is still usable without an info browser. The manpages-dev package for > example does not depend on man-browser, it merely suggests it. Maybe, but that's out of the scope of this bug report :) > > or to "rm -rf" the dir, IMO) > As I said, I'd vote to add install-info as a build dependency since > documentation is the purpose of this package. Ok ... but: I guess I'm to tired for today: Anyway I tried now: + removed install-info from the chroot - first build without install-info in the build-deps and with "rm -f" - second build with install-info + both builds succeed and both packages have the identical contents So IMO the only problem is the "rm" of the not existing file in debian/rules (in the case without install-info). And changing this to "rm -f" so that it works both with and without install-info would be the easiest solution. But I'd appreciate you checking and I will take again tomorrow. Cheers, gregor -- .''`. http://info.comodo.priv.at/ -- GPG key IDs: 0x8649AA06, 0x00F3CFE4 : :' : Debian GNU/Linux user, admin, & developer - http://www.debian.org/ `. `' Member of VIBE!AT & SPI, fellow of Free Software Foundation Europe `- NP: Pogues: Boys From The County Hell
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
