Re: Issues with releasing bzip2 1.0.1
David Starner <dvdeug@x8b4e516e.dhcp.okstate.edu> writes:
> On Fri, Sep 15, 2000 at 10:26:53AM -0700, Philippe Troin wrote:
> >
> > Hi have some issues with releasing bzip2 1.0.1.
> > Namely, the current bzip2 source package (0.95d-3) generates three
> > packages:
> > libbz2
> > libbz2-dev (depends on libbz2)
> > bzip2 (depends on libbz2)
> >
> > Quite a few packages depend on libbz2 0.95b.
> > And 0.95d-3 has been released only a couple of days ago.
> > For some reasons, libbz2-1.0.1 has to conflict with libbz2 << 0.95b-3.
> >
> > Solution #1:
>
> [Cut a lot of solutions keeping both libbz2 and libbz2-1]
> How about Solution #4: Abbandon libbz2. It'll make all those packages
> uninstallable, but this is unstable, and they'll get recompiled well
> before release. I prefer to keep as few copies of libraries as possible,
> and this early in Woody, it's easy to completely replace a library.
> This may not be such a good idea if they aren't source compatible,
> though.
Libbz2 0.x and 1.0.1 are source incompatible, although the needed
changes are minor (adding a prefix to all bz2 related functions).
Plus I hate to have uninstallable packages. I'd rather plan to get all
the packages depending on libbz2 recompiled (or NMU them myself), but
keep woody installable.
Phil.
Reply to: