Re: https://github.com/ilbers/hello conflicts with upstream hello

[Henning Schild <henning.schild@siemens.com>]

Am Thu, 17 Jan 2019 16:28:09 +0100
schrieb Baurzhan Ismagulov <ibr@radix50.net>:

> On Thu, Jan 17, 2019 at 04:03:01PM +0100, Henning Schild wrote:
> > i am building apt-get source support for Isar and am using "hello"
> > as an example application. Turn out that the upstream hello package
> > places /usr/bin/hello and example-hello from isar is doing the same.
> > 
> > I suggest to update example-hello to choose another binary name and
> > resolve the collision.  
> 
> Conflicting packages are explicitly allowed in Debian. How can we
> reproduce your problem with /usr/bin/hello?

Yes, but conflicts that are known are mentioned in the metadata.
(debian/control)
So apt sees it before dpkg unpacks it and finds it.

I just sent a series that shows the problem. You can also see it if you
IMAGE_INSTALL=example-hello and IMAGE_PREINSTALL=hello

> > My series to Isar will just remove example-hello for now, it should
> > be re-added once the issue is solved.  
> 
> I don't have anything against renaming the binary to e.g. hello-isar,
> but I think the suggested approach is an unnecessary overkill.

That or the metadata should know about the conflict. We can not change
upstream metadata, maybe one side is good enough.

One way or another. My series adds the feature to rebuild an upstream
package, and hello is a very good example for that. A conflict would
mean we could not test example-hello and hello in the same image, so
avoiding the conflict will be useful for that case and not overkill.

Henning

> 
> With kind regards,
> Baurzhan.
>