Ubuntu
silky package

[FTBFS] silky (0.5.4-0.1) fails to build in gutsy

Bug #135782 reported by Cesare Tirabassi on 2007-08-30

Affects		Status	Importance	Assigned to	Milestone
	silky (Debian)	Fix Released	Unknown	debbugs #474073
	silky (Ubuntu)	Fix Released	Medium	Unassigned

Bug Description

Binary package hint: silky

E: Couldn't find package libsilc-1.0-2-dev

libsilc-1.0-2-dev has been replaced by libsilc-1.1-2-dev

Cesare Tirabassi (norsetto) on 2007-08-30

Changed in silky:
assignee:	nobody → norsetto
status:	New → In Progress

Revision history for this message

Cesare Tirabassi (norsetto) wrote on 2007-08-30:

build log with new library Edit (65.4 KiB, text/plain)

silky FTBFS with new library due to the number of changes in the API.

See debian bug #433820.

Note that upstream is no more:

http://sourceforge.net/forum/forum.php?forum_id=717434

Bug Watch Updater (bug-watch-updater) on 2007-08-31

Changed in silky:
status:	Unknown → New

William Grant (wgrant) on 2007-08-31

Changed in silky:
importance:	Undecided → Medium

Cesare Tirabassi (norsetto) on 2007-09-29

Changed in silky:
assignee:	norsetto → nobody
status:	In Progress → Confirmed

Revision history for this message

Sense Egbert Hofstede (sense) wrote on 2007-10-18:

I can confirm that the library versions don't match. But should the application be removed if it's no longer maintained? It can be a security treat for it's potential users, since there will be no fixes released. It also won't be adapted to new libraries what will cause the very problem we have here.

Revision history for this message

Tomás Reyes (trcecilio) wrote on 2007-10-24:

As a workaround, I used the libsilc-1.0-2-dev package from the Feisty repositories.

https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/silky/+bug/155442

Revision history for this message

Andrew Starr-Bochicchio (andrewsomething) wrote on 2008-03-16:

No opinion if this should be removed or not, but confirming that it does still not install on Hardy. Obviously something needs to happen to the depends if nothing else.

silky:
Depends: libsilc-1.0-2 but it is not installable

Revision history for this message

Cesare Tirabassi (norsetto) wrote on 2008-03-16:

The chances to remove it if this is still not removed in Debian are very slim. If anybody picks up the work done by Jeremy and finishes it (effectively taking over upstream) will obviously revive it.
The process for requesting a removal is described here:

https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UbuntuDevelopment/PackageArchive#head-6a4a4d2ad0cc004c6199f465539e3bbc2239291e

Revision history for this message

agent 8131 (agent-8131) wrote on 2008-04-03:

I can confirm that this is still not fixed in Hardy beta. I believe there are 2 solutions:

1. Remove the silky package from the repositories.
2. Add the libsilc-1.0-2 package to the repositories.

Either will work and I don't have a preference for which, but one fix or the other should be implemented.

Revision history for this message

Cesare Tirabassi (norsetto) wrote on 2008-04-06:

Archive admins, please remove silky from the archive.
It doesn't build with the newer libsilc and upstream is no more.
The package has been removed from Debian unstable:

http://packages.qa.debian.org/s/silky/news/20080403T225716Z.html

Revision history for this message

Steve Langasek (vorlon) wrote on 2008-04-08:

2008-04-08 03:48:38 INFO creating lockfile
2008-04-08 03:48:41 INFO Removing candidates:
2008-04-08 03:48:41 INFO silky 0.5.4-0.1 in hardy
2008-04-08 03:48:41 INFO silky 0.5.4-0.1 in hardy amd64
2008-04-08 03:48:41 INFO silky 0.5.4-0.1 in hardy i386
2008-04-08 03:48:41 INFO silky 0.5.4-0.1 in hardy ia64
2008-04-08 03:48:41 INFO silky 0.5.4-0.1 in hardy powerpc
2008-04-08 03:48:41 INFO silky 0.5.4-0.1 in hardy sparc
2008-04-08 03:48:41 INFO Removed-by: Steve Langasek
2008-04-08 03:48:41 INFO Comment: FTBFS, removed from Debian; LP #135782
2008-04-08 03:48:41 INFO 6 packages successfully removed.
2008-04-08 03:48:41 INFO Transaction committed.
2008-04-08 03:48:41 INFO The archive will be updated in the next publishing cycle.