[arch-dev-public] bluez from testing and pilot-link
aaronmgriffin at gmail.com
Mon Jan 5 14:13:36 EST 2009
On Mon, Jan 5, 2009 at 12:48 PM, Jan de Groot <jan at jgc.homeip.net> wrote:
> On Mon, 2009-01-05 at 18:38 +0100, Andreas Radke wrote:
>> Am Mon, 5 Jan 2009 13:45:11 +0100
>> schrieb "Geoffroy Carrier" <geoffroy.carrier at koon.fr>:
>> > On Sun, Dec 28, 2008 at 12:51, Jan de Groot <jan at jgc.homeip.net>
>> > wrote:
>> > > I have bluez in my IgnorePkg for a long time already. Bluez in
>> > > testing is a mess at this moment.
>> > It shouldn't be anymore!
>> > Finally started my dev job...
>> [root at workstation64 andyrtr]# LANG=C pacman -Syu
>> :: Synchronizing package databases...
>> testing is up to date
>> core is up to date
>> extra is up to date
>> community is up to date
>> :: Starting full system upgrade...
>> :: Replace bluez-libs with testing/bluez? [Y/n]
>> warning: libx11: local (188.8.131.52-0.1) is newer than extra (1.1.5-2)
>> warning: libxcb: local (1.1.93-1) is newer than extra (184.108.40.206-1)
>> resolving dependencies...
>> looking for inter-conflicts...
>> error: failed to prepare transaction (could not satisfy dependencies)
>> :: pilot-link: requires bluez-libs>=3.32
>> [root at workstation64 andyrtr]# LANG=C pacman -Ss bluez
>> testing/bluez 4.25-1
>> Libraries and tools for the Bluetooth protocol stack
>> it's still now satisfied...
>> I'm not sure if pacman can do this at all when we use version numbers
>> in the (make)depends array. Maybe we should add the required version
>> number in the provides array too? Dan?
> We should have a rebuilt version of pilot-link (and maybe gnome-pilot)
> in testing that matches the bluez update. I don't see reason to provide
> bluez-libs, as any application that linked against bluez-libs is broken
> when it's run with bluez.
Agreed. This may still be a pacman issue, though.
Let's see if I have this right:
bluez-libs: provides nothing
bluez: provides bluez-libs
pilot-link: depends on bluez-libs>=3.32
So, does bluez just provide "bluez-libs" or is it versioned?
Regardless, though, rebuilding pilot-link should fix this particular issue
More information about the arch-dev-public