[Pkg-kde-extras] Bug#952426: digikam: digkam experimental not correctly instalable

[Eric Valette]

On 24/02/2020 12:09, Simon Frei wrote:

> Firstly: I don't upload digikam to debian. I am just a user interested
> in having it packaged and very occasional contributor upstream. By
> helping to triage and clarify bugs I hope to remove some workload from
> Steve (uploader), which hopefully makes it more likely to keep getting
> packages from him (thanks a lot for that!).

Well one way to avoid having bugs is to follow the rules for building 
using up-to-date packages environment  (hdf5 had a version in 
experimental long before digikam was build and 6.4 build procedure 
removed the dependency completely) and obviously the automatic shared 
libs dependencies are wrong as I got the bug twice in raw (5.9 and then 
7.0.0)

> And my bad, apparently libhdf5-103 still ships the .100 lib:
> 
>      libhdf5-103: /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libhdf5_serial_hl.so.100

Which by the way is quite curious and probably buggy as well.

Note that 6.4 ldd digikam does no even list libhdf5_serial_hl.so.100 or 
even libhdf5* as dynamic library dependency anymore (if you look at the 
bug report, Austin mail, that is why I closed it).

So the way 7.0.0 has been build is probably based on an old9 build 
procedure (or the build instruction for 7.0 have changed again


> At least it does in testing. I now upgraded libhdf5-103 to experimental
> and I do get the same error you do. Maybe at the time the experimental
> build was done the old version of hdf5 was still in experimental. 

No because digikam 67.0.0 appered 2020-02-18. The day it appeared, the 
bug was present. And https://tracker.debian.org/pkg/hdf5 say a diffrent 
story about hdf5 in experimental. One could argue that building for 
experimental does not formally require using experimental version of 
packages but as soon as someone do an experimental upgrade things go 
wrong so it is wise to use the packages that are already in experimental 
even if it can prevent upgrading longer.

> Anyway
> the fix for you is to downgrade libhdf5-103 to unstable and for the
> package probably as simple as a rebuild (which in my opinion isn't
> really necessary unless there's another change, e.g. beta3).


I can rebuild myself indeed, I even build manually digikam in the past 
but it
	1) does not fix the bug for others,
	2) If I do not rebuild, I will need to freeze the package as I always 
do experimental update on a regular basis (if not everyday).


-- eric