:: [devuan-dev] udisks2 in beowulf
Pàgina inicial
Delete this message
Reply to this message
Autor: fsmithred
Data:  
A: devuan-dev
Assumpte: [devuan-dev] udisks2 in beowulf
Why do we repackage udisks2? The version in beowulf and ceres is way
behind everything else.

apt-cache policy udisks2
udisks2:
   Installed: (none)
   Candidate: 2.1.8-1+devuan2
   Version table:
      2.8.1-4 10
          10 http://debian.csail.mit.edu/debian buster/main amd64 Packages
      2.6.5-2+devuan1 20
          20 http://deb.devuan.org/devuan experimental/main amd64 Packages
      2.1.8-1+devuan2 500
         500 http://deb.devuan.org/merged ascii/main amd64 Packages
      2.1.8-1 10
          10 http://debian.csail.mit.edu/debian stretch/main amd64 Packages
      2.1.3-5+devuan2 50
          50 http://deb.devuan.org/merged beowulf/main amd64 Packages
          50 http://pkgmaster.devuan.org/merged ceres/main amd64 Packages



Someone on DNG tried to install gnome-disk-utility in beowulf and failed
for this reason.

The following packages have unmet dependencies:
  gnome-disk-utility : Depends: udisks2 (>= 2.7.6) but 2.1.8-1+devuan2 is 
installed
                       Depends: libudisks2-0 (>= 2.7.6) but 
2.1.8-1+devuan2 is installed



If I add a buster repo and try to install gnome-disk-utility, aptitude
gives me the following as a second choice (first choice was to leave it
uninstalled.)

      Install the following packages:
1)     libblockdev-fs2 [2.20-7 (stable, testing)]
2)     libblockdev-loop2 [2.20-7 (stable, testing)]
3)     libblockdev-part-err2 [2.20-7 (stable, testing)]
4)     libblockdev-part2 [2.20-7 (stable, testing)]
5)     libblockdev-swap2 [2.20-7 (stable, testing)]
6)     libblockdev-utils2 [2.20-7 (stable, testing)]
7)     libblockdev2 [2.20-7 (stable, testing)]


      Upgrade the following packages:
8)     libudisks2-0 [2.1.8-1+devuan2 (now) -> 2.8.1-4 (stable)]
9)     udisks2 [2.1.8-1+devuan2 (now) -> 2.8.1-4 (stable)]



The libblockdev packages are same version in buster and beowulf. I don't 
see any systemd in there. My question was the first sentence in this email:
    Why do we repackage udisks2?


fsmithred