[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Mass bugfiling in preparation for multiarch



On Mon, Mar 16, 2009 at 03:40:53PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Aurelien Jarno <aurelien@aurel32.net> writes:
> 
> > If you want to get some more multiarch ennemies, this is clearly the way
> > to go.
> >
> > The alternate method is to post a list to debian-devel, and when we have
> > a basic multiarch support, you may start thinking about filling bugs.
> > Not before.
> 
> Well, regardless of the benefits for multiarch, library packages
> containing binaries that don't change names with different SONAMEs violate
> a Policy must at present.  So either they're RC bugs or Policy is wrong
> about the severity.
> 
> It's a theoretical problem in libc6 in particular since the chances of
> libc6 changing SONAMEs again is low and there would be a lot of other work
> to have to do to deal with that apart from the binaries in /usr/bin, but
> the situation for other libraries is much more concrete.  I've already
> filed an RC bug about this in one other package that I ran into.  I think
> such bugs are fair game regardless of whether or not we're trying to
> implement multiarch (with the normal caveats about mass bug filing).
> 
> If the file does change with SONAME, that's a different matter, and that
> part depends more on our multiarch direction.
> 

Still mass filling bugs is not the solution here. As it see seems we like
policy and reference, let me quote the developer reference 7.2:

"Please use the programms dd-list and if appropriate whodepends (from
the package devscripts) to generate a list of all affected packages, and
include the output in your mail to <debian-devel@lists.debian.org>."

That's what I suggested.

-- 
Aurelien Jarno	                        GPG: 1024D/F1BCDB73
aurelien@aurel32.net                 http://www.aurel32.net


Reply to: