Packages with unsatisfied versioned BDs don't go into depwait
| Affects | Status | Importance | Assigned to | Milestone | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| launchpad-buildd |
Fix Released
|
High
|
Colin Watson | ||
Bug Description
I uploaded gst-libav1.0 to my PPA (I won't supersede this) - it has a versioned dependency that can't be satisfied in wily currently.
https:/
The following packages have unmet dependencies:
sbuild-
With the old resolver, we'd see output like
After installing, the following source dependencies are still unsatisfied:
libwayland-
i.e. there was a check was performed after installing the BDs.
I think "but it is not going to be installed" means that the package is available but uninstallable. Launchpad's historically failed builds with uninstallable build-deps (pending some more smarts e.g. bug #527245), so this much is intentional and perhaps there isn't a way to distinguish the cases we genuinely want to fail.
Related branches
- William Grant: Approve (code)
-
Diff: 503 lines (+383/-12) (has conflicts)3 files modifieddebian/changelog (+7/-0)
lpbuildd/binarypackage.py (+148/-2)
lpbuildd/tests/test_binarypackage.py (+228/-10)
| Colin Watson (cjwatson) wrote | #1 |
| affects: | launchpad → launchpad-buildd |
| Changed in launchpad-buildd: | |
| importance: | Undecided → High |
| status: | New → Triaged |
| tags: | added: regression |
| Changed in launchpad-buildd: | |
| assignee: | nobody → Colin Watson (cjwatson) |
| status: | Triaged → In Progress |
| Changed in launchpad-buildd: | |
| status: | In Progress → Fix Committed |
| Colin Watson (cjwatson) wrote | #2 |
| Changed in launchpad-buildd: | |
| status: | Fix Committed → Fix Released |
| Iain Lane (laney) wrote | #3 |
10:18 <cjwatson> wgrant: Hm, https:/
10:20 <cjwatson> wgrant: Oh, no, never mind, that's uninstallability more than one level deep
10:22 <cjwatson> wgrant: This is maybe a little unfortunate, because I think it really is just that one. Probably an sbuild bug in that it should be using "apt-get build-dep".
10:23 <cjwatson> Yeah, everything's fine in that build-dependency set apart from the version restriction
10:27 <cjwatson> Tempting to do http://
10:56 <wgrant> cjwatson: Will that reliably cope with alternatives?
10:56 <wgrant> There are some complexities there.
10:58 <cjwatson> build-dep should in general cope better than install. The only reason I didn't do it in the first place in that code was that I was being conservative when fixing up cross handling.
10:58 <cjwatson> But it certainly makes sense to check that.
10:58 <cjwatson> Hm, it's perhaps possible that it would break the --no-resolve-
11:00 * cjwatson leaves an XXX comment for himself to check that later