Bug#1034443: python3-brial: uninstallable on arcitectures where sagemath is unavailable, breaks building of singular

[Paul Gevers]

Hi Peter,

On 23-04-2023 21:24, Peter Michael Green wrote:
> That works in some cases, but it's a bad option here for two reasons.
> 
> 1. It would create a build-dependency loop between brial and sagemath.

Which isn't practical problem as long as there is a proper build profile 
involved, right? But given point 2, I think both the point and this is 
argument are moot.

> 2. It would mean that other binary packages built from the brial source 
> package had their architecture list unnecessarily limited.

Aha, I missed that detail. There are more arch:<non-all> binaries build 
by src:brial.

>  > Technically I even think that this isn't a bug in python3-brial.
> 
> One of the criteria (indeed the first on the list) for grave is "makes 
> the package in question unusable or mostly so". I consider that a 
> package that cannot be installed is unusable.

If I follow that reasoning than about 850 arch:all binaries also have RC 
bugs: https://qa.debian.org/dose/debcheck/testing_main/1682226002/some.html

> My understanding has always been that for source packages that build 
> multiple binaries, the test of "is the package unusable" is applied for 
> each binary package individually and that for packages that are built 
> separately for multiple architectures (not arch all packages) it is 
> applied for each architecture individually. I don't think that is 
> officially written down anywhere though.

Can you point to a discussion where we might draw the conclusion that 
this is common practice or consensus? I *personally* [no hats on] find 
that distinction a bit weird although I can see how we would come to it 
and also why.

>> This seems to be your real issue. Why file the bug against python3-brial?
> When an issue involving multiple packages shows up on my radar, I tend 
> to start by filing a bug with the package where a fix could potentially 
> have the most impact and cc the maintainers of other packages that are 
> involved.

Ack. And I agree with this approach. However, we are *also* in the Hard 
Freeze, so RC bugs reports have more severe results if not treated swiftly.

> If the maintainer of brial came back and said that the fix for bug 
> 1033878 was wrong, and that python3-brial could in-fact be made usable 
> on all architectures then there would.

[missing words?] Yes, sure. However, looking at the stack trace in that 
bug, I agree that the dependency is the most logical solution. Ensuring 
python3-brial to be useful without that dependency will require patching 
the code by the looks of it.

Paul
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: OpenPGP_signature
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 495 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://alioth-lists.debian.net/pipermail/debian-science-maintainers/attachments/20230423/18a47ee4/attachment.sig>