Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > linux.debian.user > #222459 > unrolled thread

package python3-chardet breaks package python-chardet

Back to article view | Back to linux.debian.user

Contents

  package python3-chardet breaks package python-chardet Marco Möller <talby@debianlists.mobilxpress.net> - 2020-05-13 16:30 +0200
    Re: package python3-chardet breaks package python-chardet Marco Möller <talby@debianlists.mobilxpress.net> - 2020-05-13 17:50 +0200
      Re: package python3-chardet breaks package python-chardet Andrei POPESCU <andreimpopescu@gmail.com> - 2020-05-14 08:40 +0200
        Re: package python3-chardet breaks package python-chardet Marco Möller <talby@debianlists.mobilxpress.net> - 2020-05-14 11:50 +0200
          Re: package python3-chardet breaks package python-chardet Andrei POPESCU <andreimpopescu@gmail.com> - 2020-05-14 13:10 +0200
            Re: package python3-chardet breaks package python-chardet Marco Möller <talby@debianlists.mobilxpress.net> - 2020-05-14 22:10 +0200

#222459 — package python3-chardet breaks package python-chardet

As package python3-chardet defines to break package python-chardet, I 
cannot upgrade python3-chardet because I am still very satisfied using 
software "cherrytree" which depends on python-chardet. My finding is, 
that I would have to remove python-chardet, which subsequently would 
also remove cherrytree. This is also the solution found by 'apt 
dist-upgrade'.
I am wondering why those packages could not simply stay installed in 
parallel, as before, or what other solution I now could have available?
If there is no practicable solution, then how to proceed? Writing an 
email to the package maintainers and ask them to rethink about the 
defined dependencies of their packages, asking Piotr to maybe remove the 
"breaks" definition, or asking Guiseppe to "depend" on python3-chardet 
instead of python chardet? I am not feeling good with either of these ideas.
How would you treat this?
Thanks, Marco.

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#222460

On 13.05.20 16:23, Marco Möller wrote:
> As package python3-chardet defines to break package python-chardet, I 
> cannot upgrade python3-chardet because I am still very satisfied using 
> software "cherrytree" which depends on python-chardet. My finding is, 
> that I would have to remove python-chardet, which subsequently would 
> also remove cherrytree. This is also the solution found by 'apt 
> dist-upgrade'.
> I am wondering why those packages could not simply stay installed in 
> parallel, as before, or what other solution I now could have available?
> If there is no practicable solution, then how to proceed? Writing an 
> email to the package maintainers and ask them to rethink about the 
> defined dependencies of their packages, asking Piotr to maybe remove the 
> "breaks" definition, or asking Guiseppe to "depend" on python3-chardet 
> instead of python chardet? I am not feeling good with either of these 
> ideas.
> How would you treat this?
> Thanks, Marco.
> 

SORRY for the noise! I should have done my homework first:
FrankenDebian detected.

- cherrytree was not installed from the Debian repository
- /etc/apt/sources.list contains:
     deb http://debian.redimadrid.es/debian/ bullseye main non-free contrib
     deb http://debian.redimadrid.es/debian/ sid main

I remember very well why it is needed to get Cherrytree from upstream 
and it is thus clear that I have to search for the solution there, and 
not to bother the Debian package maintainer of python3-chardet for the 
long time obsolete python-chardet package.
I also will first have to figure out again what in the past made me 
include /sid to my sources.list file. This was most likely for receiving 
as early as possible the Firefox and Thunderbird upgrades? This was 
actually the reason to switch half a year ago from the /stable to the 
/testing distribution and maybe I was still not satisfied with the 
delays for these packages until they become available in /testing, 
although already far better than for /stable?
Unfortunately I now see that there are already many packages from /sid 
residing in my supposed to be /testing installation. FrankenDebian 
detected. THIS I HAVE TO FIX NOW FIRST!

So, I'll do my homework now first and shut up. Again, SORRY for the noise!

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#222478

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On Mi, 13 mai 20, 17:40:45, Marco Möller wrote:
> Unfortunately I now see that there are already many packages from /sid
> residing in my supposed to be /testing installation. FrankenDebian detected.

This might happen if the package has the same version in testing as in 
unstable. 'apt list <package>' is correct (as well as
'apt policy <pacakge>').

Kind regards,
Andrei
-- 
http://wiki.debian.org/FAQsFromDebianUser

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#222483

On 14.05.20 08:36, Andrei POPESCU wrote:
> On Mi, 13 mai 20, 17:40:45, Marco Möller wrote:
>> Unfortunately I now see that there are already many packages from /sid
>> residing in my supposed to be /testing installation. FrankenDebian detected.
> 
> This might happen if the package has the same version in testing as in
> unstable. 'apt list <package>' is correct (as well as
> 'apt policy <pacakge>').

According to the following command I currently have some roughly 60 
packages from /unstable in my supposed to be /testing Debian 
installation, besides some manually installed packages:

   apt list -a | grep installed | grep -v -E 'testing|local'

I meanwhile figured out that the easiest way for obtaining my wished 
result to include Firefox from /unstable into my otherwise /testing 
Debian installation could be to define some "Pin-Priority" in a file like:

   /etc/apt/preferences.d/package-pinning.pref

I now created such file and defined the following rules (I do not have 
an  apt.conf  file which could interfere with a potential 
Default-Release definition there):

   Explanation: prefer this specific package to be taken from unstable
   Package: firefox
   Pin: release a=unstable
   Pin-Priority: 600

   Explanation: generally ignore unstable packages
   Package: *
   Pin: release unstable
   Pin-Priority: 50

As downgrades are risky and the packages drawn in by the apt upgrades 
obviously show recent maintenance activity, I am for now hoping that the 
package maintenance activity will continue and by this in a couple of 
weeks my installation will clean up automatically when again using all 
packages (except Firefox) from /testing once newer versions than I have 
them now installed from /unstable will have arrived in /testing.

Concerning the Cherrytree and python-chardet problem my plan is to even 
more trust in 'hope' that cherrytree will after years soon find its way 
back into the currently updating Debian repositories.  :-(

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#222488

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On Jo, 14 mai 20, 11:40:51, Marco Möller wrote:
> On 14.05.20 08:36, Andrei POPESCU wrote:
> > On Mi, 13 mai 20, 17:40:45, Marco Möller wrote:
> > > Unfortunately I now see that there are already many packages from /sid
> > > residing in my supposed to be /testing installation. FrankenDebian detected.
> > 
> > This might happen if the package has the same version in testing as in
> > unstable. 'apt list <package>' is correct (as well as
> > 'apt policy <pacakge>').
> 
> According to the following command I currently have some roughly 60 packages
> from /unstable in my supposed to be /testing Debian installation, besides
> some manually installed packages:
> 
>   apt list -a | grep installed | grep -v -E 'testing|local'

'apt list' also has the '--installed' switch. You can then drop the '-a' 
as you only care about the installed version.
 
> I meanwhile figured out that the easiest way for obtaining my wished result
> to include Firefox from /unstable into my otherwise /testing Debian
> installation could be to define some "Pin-Priority" in a file like:
> 
>   /etc/apt/preferences.d/package-pinning.pref
> 
> I now created such file and defined the following rules (I do not have an
> apt.conf  file which could interfere with a potential Default-Release
> definition there):
> 
>   Explanation: prefer this specific package to be taken from unstable
>   Package: firefox
>   Pin: release a=unstable
>   Pin-Priority: 600
> 
>   Explanation: generally ignore unstable packages
>   Package: *
>   Pin: release unstable
>   Pin-Priority: 50

For using testing with selected packages from unstable the same scheme 
used by stable + backports should work:

    * pin unstable to 100
    * no specific package pin
    * install packages with 'apt install -t unstable <package>'

This will also ensure automatic upgrades and works without any further 
configuration in case you decide later you need additional packages from 
unstable.

> As downgrades are risky and the packages drawn in by the apt upgrades
> obviously show recent maintenance activity, I am for now hoping that the
> package maintenance activity will continue and by this in a couple of weeks
> my installation will clean up automatically when again using all packages
> (except Firefox) from /testing once newer versions than I have them now
> installed from /unstable will have arrived in /testing.

In general yes. In practice some packages from unstable will never reach 
testing for various reasons. In case you still have unstable-only 
package versions in a couple of weeks you could investigate on 
tracker.debian.org why they haven't migrated to testing (yet).

> Concerning the Cherrytree and python-chardet problem my plan is to even more
> trust in 'hope' that cherrytree will after years soon find its way back into
> the currently updating Debian repositories.  :-(

Debian intends to remove Python 2 as soon as possible (preferably for 
bullseye).

https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2019/11/msg00000.html

Kind regards,
Andrei
-- 
http://wiki.debian.org/FAQsFromDebianUser

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#222509

On 14.05.20 13:09, Andrei POPESCU wrote:
>> Concerning the Cherrytree and python-chardet problem my plan is to even more
>> trust in 'hope' that cherrytree will after years soon find its way back into
>> the currently updating Debian repositories.  :-(
> 
> Debian intends to remove Python 2 as soon as possible (preferably for
> bullseye).
> 
> https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2019/11/msg00000.html

[SOLVED]
I found the flatpak version of cherrytree to be up-to-date and it so far 
seems to run fine. Only the window decoration of the running flatpak app 
is now not following my otherwise in KDE Plasma configured style, but 
that's not really an issue.
So, I purged the from the *.deb manually installed cherrytree package, 
and of course also a dependency which in the past I also have had to 
install separately to get cherrytree running. Consequently some 'apt 
autoremove' cleaned up further. I finally could upgrade the still marked 
for hold package python3-chardet, which removed the python-chardet 
package, could let follow another 'apt autoremove", and the original 
problem of this thread "package python3-chardet breaks package 
python-chardet" became solved. During the installation of 
python3-chardet the maintainer kindly informed about the former 
python-chardet commands now being python3 and no more python2 versions, 
reusing the original command names as they have been named before in the 
python2 version.
@Andrei, Thanks!
Regards, Marco.

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | linux.debian.user

csiph-web