Bug#1133748: 6 packages from scotch fail to coinstall

[Drew Parsons]

On 2026-05-02 16:26, Helmut Grohne wrote:
> Control: tags -1 - moreinfo
> 
> Hi Drew,
> 
> On Sat, May 02, 2026 at 01:56:47PM +0200, Drew Parsons wrote:
>> Helmut, file clash bug reports like this need to give more detail or
>> at least more context.  Otherwise it's trying to find a needle in a
>> haystack second guessing where the clash happened.
> 
> Really? Let's try figuring this out. The simplest of those packages
> probably is libscotch-dev. The simplest of architecture combinations
> probably is amd64 and i386. Download both packages, diff the filename 
> at
> hand.
> 
> --- amd64/usr/include/scotch/scotch.h   2026-02-25 14:34:20.000000000 
> +0100
> +++ i386/usr/include/scotch/scotch.h    2026-02-25 14:34:20.000000000 
> +0100
> @@ -137,7 +137,7 @@
>  #endif /* LIB_SCOTCH_H_UNIQUE */
> 
>  typedef struct {
> -  double                    dummy[11];
> +  double                    dummy[6];
>  } SCOTCH_Arch;
> 
> None of this involved much guesswork. Why do you compare this to
> searching a needle in a haystack? What I consider finding a needle in a
> haystack is taking this diff and figuring out what caused these numbers
> to change.

It really is guesswork. How am I supposed to know the conflict is 
between amd64 and i386 if the bug report doesn't inform me of that? 
There are 18 architectures. They are not all be conflict.That makes 153 
different pairs to check. It's not reasonable to expect us to check 
every separate combination. Especially if your tool already knows where 
the problem is.  Your tool needs to report what it knows, instead of 
expecting us to guess which subset of 153 different architecture pairs 
is involved.

Drew