Bug#591881: vlc-nox: package fails to upgrade properly from lenny

[Julian Andres Klode]

On Fr, 2010-08-06 at 15:38 -0400, Moritz Muehlenhoff wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> On Fri, Aug 06, 2010 at 02:55:31PM -0400, Reinhard Tartler wrote:
> 
> > In any case, Moritz has localized this issue:
> > 
> > jmm at galadriel:~$ sudo chroot chroots/lenny/
> > root at galadriel:/# apt-get install libavformat52 libavcodec51
> > Reading package lists... Done
> > Building dependency tree
> > Reading state information... Done
> > libavcodec51 is already the newest version.
> > libavcodec51 set to manually installed.
> > Some packages could not be installed. This may mean that you have
> > requested an impossible situation or if you are using the unstable
> > distribution that some required packages have not yet been created
> > or been moved out of Incoming.
> > The following information may help to resolve the situation:
> > 
> > The following packages have unmet dependencies:
> >   libavformat52: Breaks: libavcodec51 (< 3:0.svn20090303-1) but 0.svn20080206-18+lenny1 is to be installed
> > E: Broken packages
> > root at galadriel:/#
> > 
> > The breaks is in place to force apt to not install libavformat52
> > together with libavcodec51; The corresponding changelog entry is here:
> > 
> > ffmpeg-debian (3:0.svn20090303-1) unstable; urgency=low
> > 
> > [...]
> >   * The libavformat52 now links against libavcodec52, which breaks
> >     applications that *ALSO* link against libavcodec51. Adding a
> >     Breaks: libavcodec51 should prevent this and (hopefully) Closes: #516885.
> > [...]
> > 
> >  -- Reinhard Tartler <siretart at tauware.de>  Tue, 03 Mar 2009 21:01:25 +0100
> > 
> > Now we are having other upgrade problems. hrmpf.
> > 
> > any ideas what's the correct approach here?
> 
> This smells like a apt bug, it seems to not parse the versioned Breaks
> correctly? aptitude gets it right.
> 
> Since all the packages in Squeeze have been recompiled and libavcodec51
> no longer exists, you might just as well drop the Breaks. AFAICT it was
> needed for the transition, which is now done?
> 
This would not be totally correct as libavcodec51 is in stable, and
partial upgrades would break.

-- 
Julian Andres Klode  - Debian Developer, Ubuntu Member

See http://wiki.debian.org/JulianAndresKlode and http://jak-linux.org/.