From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: <f.gruenbichler@proxmox.com> Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (firstgate.proxmox.com [212.224.123.68]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4BCDA91571 for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Mon, 27 Mar 2023 09:58:33 +0200 (CEST) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 2EFFC2D2CB for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Mon, 27 Mar 2023 09:58:33 +0200 (CEST) Received: from proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (proxmox-new.maurer-it.com [94.136.29.106]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTPS for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Mon, 27 Mar 2023 09:58:32 +0200 (CEST) Received: from proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id D4A6246F03 for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Mon, 27 Mar 2023 09:58:31 +0200 (CEST) Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2023 09:58:31 +0200 (CEST) From: =?UTF-8?Q?Fabian_Gr=C3=BCnbichler?= <f.gruenbichler@proxmox.com> To: Proxmox VE development discussion <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>, Thomas Lamprecht <t.lamprecht@proxmox.com>, Noel Ullreich <n.ullreich@proxmox.com> Message-ID: <550198115.1827.1679903911278@webmail.proxmox.com> In-Reply-To: <f4c7a2b4-d93e-ccb3-6d36-dcaed3243307@proxmox.com> References: <20230324144129.59893-1-n.ullreich@proxmox.com> <f4c7a2b4-d93e-ccb3-6d36-dcaed3243307@proxmox.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 Importance: Normal X-Mailer: Open-Xchange Mailer v7.10.6-Rev39 X-Originating-Client: open-xchange-appsuite X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL 0.072 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address BAYES_00 -1.9 Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1% DMARC_MISSING 0.1 Missing DMARC policy KAM_DMARC_STATUS 0.01 Test Rule for DKIM or SPF Failure with Strict Alignment SPF_HELO_NONE 0.001 SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record SPF_PASS -0.001 SPF: sender matches SPF record Subject: Re: [pve-devel] [PATCH pve-widget-toolkit] Changed 'kr' to 'ko' in language list X-BeenThere: pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Proxmox VE development discussion <pve-devel.lists.proxmox.com> List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/options/pve-devel>, <mailto:pve-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <http://lists.proxmox.com/pipermail/pve-devel/> List-Post: <mailto:pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com> List-Help: <mailto:pve-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pve-devel>, <mailto:pve-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=subscribe> X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2023 07:58:33 -0000 > Thomas Lamprecht <t.lamprecht@proxmox.com> hat am 26.03.2023 16:51 CEST geschrieben: > > In widget-toolkit we do not depend on any i18n package as widget-toolkit is > also used in more than one project; adding an OR'd `pve-i18n | pmg-i18n | > pbs-i18n` could work but is a bit of a PITA as some tools will use the first > one here (e.g. debootstrap) if one isn't careful. So, we could instead add a > virtual proxmox-widget-toolkit-i18n package that all pmg/pve/pbs- i18n ones > provide as $binary:version and make proxmox-widget-toolkit depend on that; > would be IMO slightly cleaner. IIRC having just a Depends: on a virtually-provided package provided by more than one actual package is even worse with regards to tooling support (hence the Debian policy of always depending on "actual-package | virtual-package", like "initramfs-tools (>= 0.120+deb8u2) | linux-initramfs-tool", or "uniquely-provided-virtual-package | virtual-package", like "default-mta | mail-transport-agent" to express a preference, and the corresponding behaviour in debootstrap and buildd to only look at the first arm of an ORed dependency). Also, Provides/virtual packages are not really a good fit for this problem, since the packages don't provide the same thing and proxmox-widget-toolkit also cannot use them interchangeably (i.e., on PVE having pmg-i18n installed is a nop and doesn't help at all, but it would satisfy the dependency). I think in this case the solution would be to add Breaks to both/all involved packages for the old version (so that no combination of new+old can be installed) and add bumped versioned dependencies higher up the stack (e.g., pve-manager) to force the upgrade - if we want to have this transition, that is ;)