Where to report a bug?

Mon Apr 10 12:38:22 UTC 2023

At Mon, 10 Apr 2023 00:59:12 -0500 "Ubuntu user technical support,? not for general discussions" <ubuntu-users at lists.ubuntu.com> wrote:

> 
> On 4/9/23 9:26 PM, Robert Heller wrote:
> > At Sun, 9 Apr 2023 16:26:21 -0500 "Ubuntu user technical support,? not for general discussions" <ubuntu-users at lists.ubuntu.com> wrote:
> > 
> >>
> >> On 4/9/23 2:37 PM, Robert Heller wrote:
> >>> I need to report a bug (which I thought I reported years ago).
> >>>
> >>> It is just a packaging error:
> >>>
> >>> For some reason, installing bison++ causes bison to be removed (and vice
> >>> versa). This is not really necessary -- bison++ does not actually conflict
> >>> eith bison. The two packages are completely independent. Yes, from some points
> >>> of view they can be said to be replacements of each other, but they are
> >>> different and it does make sense to have both installed at the same time.
> >>>
> >>
> >> Here's your bug report
> >> https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/bison++/+bug/1607408
> >>
> >> The reason there's a conflict is due to both bison and bison++ supplying
> >> /usr/bin/bison, which is a filename collision. AIUI, bison++ is based on
> >> a older version of bison so it makes sense that it has a /usr/bin/bison
> >> that's different from the one supplied by the bison package.
> > 
> > bison++ supplies /usr/bin/bison++, NOT /usr/bin/bison.  There aren't any
> > actual file conflicts.
> 
> Yes, there is. You can confirm this for yourself.
> $ apt download bison
> $ apt download bison++
> These commands  will download the deb packages from the repos to the 
> current working directory.
> 
> $ dpkg-deb -c bison__2%3a3.8.2+dfsg-1build1_amd64.deb |grep bin
> drwxr-xr-x root/root         0 2022-03-23 04:43 ./usr/bin/
> -rwxr-xr-x root/root    504624 2022-03-23 04:43 ./usr/bin/bison
> -rwxr-xr-x root/root      4214 2022-03-23 04:43 ./usr/bin/bison.yacc
> 
> $ dpkg-deb -c bison++_1.21.11-5_amd64.deb |grep bin
> drwxr-xr-x root/root         0 2021-10-24 01:32 ./usr/bin/
> -rwxr-xr-x root/root     89176 2021-10-24 01:32 ./usr/bin/bison
> -rwxr-xr-x root/root     89176 2021-10-24 01:32 ./usr/bin/bison++
> -rwxr-xr-x root/root        30 2021-10-24 01:32 ./usr/bin/bison++.yacc
> 
> The bison executable in the bison package is 504624 bytes while the one 
> in the bison++ package is 89176 bytes. They're different executables 
> with the same name, which is a filename collision and which is why the 
> bison++ package conflicts with the bison one.
> 
> Now the bison executable in the bison++ package is byte-for-byte 
> identical with the bison++ executable. I don't know why it's provided as 
> an executable and not as a symbolic link, but it isn't and that's the 
> reason why the packages conflict.

It is a mistake.  The Makefile for the bison++ package does not create the 
bison executable.  The packacging creates the extra executable (and man page). 
*That* is the bug.  It is unnecessary and unneeded.

> 
> > 
> >>
> >> Unlikely to get traction with Ubuntu bug tracker since the package lives
> >> upstream in Debian and also conflicts with the bison package there too.
> >> Looking at its changelog it seems to be in maintenance mode and its
> >> development appears to have halted in the mid-90's.
> >>
> > 
> > I guess I will need to download the sources for both packages and fix them
> > myself.  (Unless there is a "trick" to tell apt to ignore the conflict.)
> > 
> There's the "--force-conflicts" option for dpkg that will install a 
> package despite its conflicting with another and overwriting the other's 
> files. However, apt will complain about broken packages installed and 
> likely won't allow any changes to the package database until the 
> situation is fixed.
> 
> You wouldn't need to build both packages from source, just one. You 
> could install the regular bison package from the main repo and then 
> install bison++ to /usr/local. The bison executable from bison++ would 
> be installed to /usr/local/bin and wouldn't conflict with the one from 
> the bison package which would be in /usr/bin, You'd still want to rename 
> or remove /usr/local/bin/bison because it would be found first in $PATH, 
> but it wouldn't conflict upon installation.
> 

I actually don't even need to do that. All I need to do is fix the file(s) in
the debian directory in the bison++ package to correct its error. Then I can
install the resulting bison++ deb file normally, putting bison++ in /usr/bin 
and bison++.1 in /usr/share/man/man1/.

-- 
Robert Heller             -- Cell: 413-658-7953 GV: 978-633-5364
Deepwoods Software        -- Custom Software Services
http://www.deepsoft.com/  -- Linux Administration Services
heller at deepsoft.com       -- Webhosting Services