Re: [Pkg-xfce-devel] XFCE 4.12 backport for Jessie

Vincent and all,

About suffix "~bpo8+1+b1" you've mentioned, it would still not work in my case, because resulting package version would be lower than one in Jessie! Let me take a practical example:

Package xfce4-mixer:

* Current source version: 1.10.3-1 in both Jessie and Stretch

* Current binary version in jessie: 1.10.3-1 (with xfce4-panel 4.10 dependency)

* Current binary version in stretch: 1.10.3-1+b1 (with xfce4-panel 4.12 dependency)

* Hypothetical binary version in jessie-backports: 1.10.3-1[X]~bpo8+1[Y] (with backported xfce4-panel 4.12 dependency)

My question is: where to put "+b1" in backported version? At position [X] or [Y]? Putting it in [Y] would result in a version number (1.10.3-1~bpo8+1+b1) lower than one in jessie (1.10.3-1). On the other hand, putting it at [X] would still result in a binary version (1.10.3-1+b1~bpo8+1) higher than one in jessie, but still lower than current one in stretch (1.10.3-1+b1).

About maintaining the whole XFCE 4.12 tree in jessie-backports, I'll keep on maintaining my own builds in OBS, eventually writing some scripts to keep track of changes in stretch and automate building and uploading backported packages whenever necessary. If I feel comfortable with the process, I will volunteer myself for maintaing it in jessie-backports. In the mean time, I still really appreciate if at least lightdm and lightdm-gtk-greeter (maintained by the same "Debian Xfce Maintainers" team) could be in jessie-backports in short term. Honestly, I only need backported xfwm4 4.12 (to better handling CSD-enabled apps), but I'm afraid it requires a full XFCE tree rebuild against 4.12 libs.

2015-08-21 15:04 GMT-03:00 Yves-Alexis Perez <corsac@debian.org>:

On Fri, Aug 21, 2015 at 11:02:10AM -0700, Vincent Cheng wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 21, 2015 at 5:26 AM, Laércio de Sousa
> <laerciosousa@sme-mogidascruzes.sp.gov.br> wrote:
> > After investigating their current binary versions in stretch (I'm only
> > watching on their source versions until now, and I'm not aware about binNMUs
> > before), I just realized that a "+b1~bop8+1" could be a good suffix for
> > those jessie packages that only need to be rebuilt against backported new
> > libs.
>
> No, a "~bpo8+1" suffix is still correct (it'll always be strictly less
> than the version in stretch). If for whatever reason you need to
> binNMU packages in backports, you can file binNMU bugs against the
> release.debian.org pseudopackage (the resulting packages will have a
> suffix of "~bpo8+1+b1").
>
> About backporting xfce 4.12 as a whole...have you discussed this with
> the Debian xfce team yet? The initial backport may be manageable, but
> is maintaining these backported packages for the entire lifetime of
> jessie (and keeping them up-to-date with stretch) feasible? Are you
> willing to handle all bug reports associated with these backported
> packages?

Honestly, I'd really prefer people actually helping us with bugs and
stuff like that (first in unstable, and let it migrate to testing and
stable following the natural flow). And do stable uploads for things
really needed, if they exists.

Regards,
--
Yves-Alexis Perez

Laércio de Sousa

Orientador de Informática

Escola Municipal "Professor Eulálio Gruppi"

Rua Ismael da Silva Mello, 559, Mogi Moderno

Mogi das Cruzes - SP
CEP 08717-390

Telefone: (11) 4726-8313