Re: [fink-core] upgrade process for big sur/dpkg1.16

[Justin H. <th...@so...>]

It will work, new debs won’t work with old dpkg but there is a dpkg pre-depends injected into them

The difference is triggers, and some of the la processing.  Current fink breaks debsums (and Debian rules) as it changes the la files after install, this changes the md5sum and thus breaks debsums to check for changed files.

The new dpkg deals with it before, and uses triggers from the fink packages to do other than that used to be injected into postinst script.

Older dpkg will just ignore fields is doesn’t know like pre-depends and triggers.  But a deb built with the dplg1.16 branch and the someone built with master won’t be the same deb which breaks fink policy.  Most of the changes and differences are all in the la files and the Debian control directory.  So the binaries and libs will be the same.

In summary there is no danger I made sure of it.  But fink policy needs to be amended if we want to allow upgrades.
---
TS
http://www.southofheaven.org/
Life begins and ends with chaos, live between the chaos!

> On Aug 28, 2020, at 1:17 PM, fi...@sn... wrote:
> 
> Will old debs work with the new dpkg? Or is the deb compatibility broken in both directions?
> 
> If we're going to need a new tree (called "11.0"?), what distributions should we put into it? Obviously macOS 11.0. Should we also put 10.14.5 and 10.15 into it? These two share the same /usr/bin/perl (v5.18.4), but it's different from 11.0 (v5.28.2). However, 11.0 has /usr/bin/perl5.18(.4) as well. Is it worth (possible?) going down to earlier system versions? 10.10-10.14 share the same system-perl (5.18.2)
> 
> Hanspeter
> 
> On 2020-08-28 11:13, Justin Hallett wrote:
>> I’m almost positive all the packages are compare (texinfo might have
>> an extra split) but you can not put dpkg into the 10.5 tree since
>> it’ll break deb compat.  This branch needs a new tree then it can be
>> added.
>> ---
>> TS
>> http://www.southofheaven.org/
>> Life begins and ends with chaos, live between the chaos!
>>> On Aug 28, 2020, at 9:59 AM, Alexander Hansen
>>> <ale...@gm...> wrote:
>>>> On Aug 28, 2020, at 02:42, Hanspeter Niederstrasser
>>>> <fi...@sn...> wrote:
>>>> What's the upgrade process for the dpkg1.16 branch and the dists
>>>> tree?
>>>> Several packages are now essential (e.g. time-date-pm and xz) and
>>>> will have to be moved from their present subfolders in dists to
>>>> 'base'. Also, some base packages have newer versions than what's
>>>> in the dpkg1.16 branch source (e.g. libiconv and texinfo). But the
>>>> dpkg1.16 branch versions have needed changes that might be
>>>> incompatible with older fink installs, so we can't just copy
>>>> what's currently in dist to the dpkg1.16 branch, or push the
>>>> dpkg1.16 branch versions directly into dists. Or are dpkg1.16
>>>> packages compatible with legacy dpkg?
>>>> Hanspeter
>>> At minimum, the most logical thing to do would be to update
>>> libiconv, texinfo, et. al. in the dpkg1.16 branch and also apply the
>>> branch-specific changes - i.e. merge them in a logical sense if not
>>> in a Git sense.  I hate to say it, but this might be a case for a
>>> new distro and clean reinstall rather than update in place.  I know
>>> we just did that for Catalina, but my impression is that Big Sur is
>>> going to change a bunch of stuff.
>>> --
>>> Alexander Hansen, Ph.D.
>>> Fink User Liaison
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> fink-core mailing list
>>> fin...@li...
>>> List archive:
>>> http://news.gmane.org/gmane.os.apple.fink.core
>>> Subscription management:
>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-core
>> _______________________________________________
>> fink-core mailing list
>> fin...@li...
>> List archive:
>> http://news.gmane.org/gmane.os.apple.fink.core
>> Subscription management:
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-core