Re: libcdio transition

[Luk Claes <luk@debian.org>]

Nicolas Boullis wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> On Fri, Jul 03, 2009 at 01:08:22AM +0200, Luk Claes wrote:
>> Nicolas Boullis wrote:
>>> Cheers,
>>>
>>> On Wed, Jul 01, 2009 at 08:03:20AM +0200, Luk Claes wrote:
>>>> If you are sure that there are no API changes, then please upload to
>>>> unstable and tell us when you did so we can schedule binNMUs (as it does
>>>> not seem to interfere with existing transitions).
>>> I just played with diff over the header files and... unfortunately, 
>>> there are some API changes. A few functions were removed (I guess nobody 
>>> used them anyway), added (that should be no problem) or even changed 
>>> (only one function, that had its return changed from int to an enum, 
>>> which should be safe).
>>>
>>> Is it alright anyway? Or would you prefer to check if everything's 
>>> alright with bin-NMUs to experimental?
>> Just manually checking the builds of all reverse build dependencies with
>> the new version on one arch would also be fine.
> 
> I checked all the packages that build-depend against libcdio-dev, 
> libiso9660-dev, libudf-dev, libcdio-cdda-dev or libcdio-paranoia-dev, 
> and all could be built without changing anything.
> 
> Hence, I just uploaded libcdio 0.81-4 to unstable (I uploaded packages 
> for i386, powerpc and sparc). Now, I think you can schedule binNMUs.

Scheduled.

Cheers

Luk