I don't want this in gcc-4.7. Please provide a patch for gcc-defaults. This should work as well.
On 22.09.2012 09:23, Andreas Beckmann wrote: > reassign 677582 gcc-4.7-base 4.7.2-2 > reopen 677582 > thanks > > On 2012-09-21 14:22, Andreas Beckmann wrote: > [...] >> I'm now trying to add these Breaks to gcc-4.7-base, that can't be held >> back, hopefully. > > Attached is a diff that finally fixes this upgrade issue, hopefully. > gcc-4.7-base isn't that "optional" as gcc-4.4-base, so it can't be held > back, actually enforcing the Breaks vs. ancient gcj. I looked a bit into > the history where these Breaks originated, and since gcc-4.7-base Breaks > old versions of gcc-4.6-base, I think it would be the right thing to do > and add the Breaks vs. 4.4, too. > > * gcc-4.7-base: ensure smooth upgrades from squeeze by adding > Breaks: gcj-4.4-base (<< 4.4.6-9~), gnat-4.4-base (<< 4.4.6-3~) > as in gcc-4.4-base (multiarch patches re-worked in 4.6.1-8/4.4.6-9). > Fixes some squeeze->wheezy upgrade paths where apt chooses to hold back > gcc-4.4-base and keep gcj-4.4-base installed instead of upgrading > gcc-4.4-base and removing the obsolete gcj-4.4-base (Andreas Beckmann). > (Closes: #677582) > > The recent changes on gcc-4.4 that attempted to fix this issue by > upgrading Breaks to Conflicts could be reverted, but they can be left as > is as they won't do harm (should just add a lintian warning for a > versioned Conflicts). > > I tested this patch with piuparts upgrade tests (squeeze->sid) on a > selection of the affected java packages (there are about 60-70 in total, > checked around 10 from different sources), and all passed once I added > an extra repository with the updated gcc-4.7 packages. > > > Andreas > -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-gcc-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/505d8e28.9070...@debian.org
