[DRE-maint] Bug#792548: Bug#792548: ruby-hashie, ruby-rash: error when trying to install together

[Antonio Terceiro]

Control: reassign -1 ruby-rash
Control: affects -1 ruby-hashie

On Thu, Jul 16, 2015 at 09:37:20AM +0200, Andreas Beckmann wrote:
> Package: ruby-hashie,ruby-rash
> Version: 3.4.2-1
> Severity: serious
> Tags: sid
> User: treinen at debian.org
> Usertags: edos-file-overwrite
> Control: found -1 0.4.0-1
> 
> Architecture: amd64
> Distribution: sid
> 
> Hi,
> 
> automatic installation tests of packages that share a file and at the
> same time do not conflict by their package dependency relationships has
> detected the following problem:
> 
>   Selecting previously unselected package ruby-rash.
>   Preparing to unpack .../ruby-rash_0.4.0-1_all.deb ...
>   Unpacking ruby-rash (0.4.0-1) ...
>   dpkg: error processing archive /var/cache/apt/archives/ruby-rash_0.4.0-1_all.deb (--unpack):
>    trying to overwrite '/usr/lib/ruby/vendor_ruby/hashie/rash.rb', which is also in package ruby-hashie 3.4.2-1
>   Errors were encountered while processing:
>    /var/cache/apt/archives/ruby-rash_0.4.0-1_all.deb
> 
> 
> This is a serious bug as it makes installation fail, and violates
> sections 7.6.1 and 10.1 of the policy. An optimal solution would
> consist in only one of the packages installing that file, and renaming
> or removing the file in the other package. Depending on the
> circumstances you might also consider Replace relations or file
> diversions. If the conflicting situation cannot be resolved then, as a
> last resort, the two packages have to declare a mutual
> Conflict. Please take into account that Replaces, Conflicts and
> diversions should only be used when packages provide different
> implementations for the same functionality.
> 
> Here is a list of files that are known to be shared by both packages
> (according to the Contents file for sid/amd64, which may be
> slightly out of sync):
> 
>   usr/lib/ruby/vendor_ruby/hashie/rash.rb
> 
> This bug is assigned to both packages. If you, the maintainers of
> the two packages in question, have agreed on which of the packages will
> resolve the problem please reassign the bug to that package. You may
> also register in the BTS that the other package is affected by the bug.
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Andreas
> 
> PS: for more information about the detection of file overwrite errors
> of this kind see https://qa.debian.org/dose/file-overwrites.html

So ruby-rash used to steal a bit of the namespace that belongs to
ruby-hashie. Judging by https://github.com/tcocca/rash/issues/9 that was
not coordinated at the upstream level, what is now causing problems.

Since ruby-rash has no reverse dependencies, I propose we remove it and
add a Conflicts: to ruby-hashie. When upstream decides on a new name it
can be packaged again. I will add the Conflicts: to ruby-rashie, and if
I don't hear any objection at some point I will request ruby-rash to be
removed from the archive.

-- 
Antonio Terceiro <terceiro at debian.org>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 819 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-ruby-extras-maintainers/attachments/20150805/2d04d4f6/attachment.sig>