Re: amd64 and sun-java6-jdk



On Thu, May 29, 2008 at 02:35:29AM +0000, Walt L. Williams wrote:

...


I kind of got the impression while working to load these that Debian
offer these Sun Java packages so they can say they offer them but
try to discourage people from using what they consider propietory
software by placing the interdependencies on three or four of the
packages to make them difficult to load. For hell sakes who makes
a group of packages that require the others to be installed first!

with all due respect, and bearing in mind that I don't use backports,
this really looks more like a mistake or transition in the backports
packages.

In reality, it's not that the other packages need to be installed
*first* so much as installed at the same time. It seems fairly common
for packages to depend on each other. So long as they are installed
simultaneously, then it's not a problem.


YEP, the cridders in question !!!!!!!!!!!!! They are interdependent.

The following packages have unmet dependencies:
sun-java6-bin: Depends: sun-java6-jre (= 6-00-2~bpo.1) but
6-06-1~bpo40+1 is to be installed
sun-java6-demo: Depends: sun-java6-jre (= 6-00-2~bpo.1) but
6-06-1~bpo40+1 is to be installed
sun-java6-jdk: Depends: sun-java6-jre (= 6-00-2~bpo.1) but
6-06-1~bpo40+1 is to be installed
sun-java6-jre: Depends: sun-java6-bin (= 6-06-1~bpo40+1) but
6-00-2~bpo.1 is to be installed or
ia32-sun-java6-bin (= 6-06-1~bpo40+1) but it is
not going to be installed
E: Broken packages


this look specifically like the jre has been pushed to version
6-06-1~bpo40+1 but the other packages, which need the jre in order to
function, are still at version 6-00-2~bpo.1. I don't know if there is
a bug system for backports, but I'd call that a packaging bug for
sure.

A

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature