Hi On 06-09-18 16:39, Antonio Terceiro wrote: >>> Does this mean that libc++-8-dev is breaking the ABI of the Qt/KDE >>> packages? Luckily libc++-8-dev will not migrate to testing due to >>> https://bugs.debian.org/714686 Does it need a "Breaks" then? >> >> Actually due to a bug in the migration process this package migrated to >> testing on 2018-08-26 despite the RC bug. It has been removed from >> testing during last night. >> >>> Does anybody know why libc++-8-dev is installed when glibc or >>> abi-compliance-checker come from unstable? It seems that package is >>> providing something that in testing is provided by libc++-dev (Or >>> somewhere else in the dependency chain this goes "wrong" and leads to >>> this outcome). >> >> I have been able to install libc++-dev along glibc 2.27-6, so I wonder >> if it is not just a matter of regenerating the testing chroot following >> the libc++-8-dev removal from testing. > > the containers on ci.debian.net are recreated from scratch once a day, > so this should solve itsef, I guess?
I don't know. In the failing cases, libc++-8-dev was installed from unstable, not from testing: Get:2 http://deb.debian.org/debian unstable/main amd64 libc++abi1-8 amd64 1:8~svn340819-1 [81.3 kB] Get:3 http://deb.debian.org/debian unstable/main amd64 libc++1-8 amd64 1:8~svn340819-1 [214 kB] Get:4 http://deb.debian.org/debian unstable/main amd64 libc++-8-helpers all 1:8~svn340819-1 [28.3 kB] Get:5 http://deb.debian.org/debian unstable/main amd64 libc++-8-dev amd64 1:8~svn340819-1 [1,473 kB] So it seems they are requested by something, and because the are not available in testing, apt-get is not limited by our pinning to take them from unstable. I believe it must be a "Provides" of some sort. What I want to know (and I will spend some time on it) is what in the dependency chain makes us end up with this as an option. Paul
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
