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

Re: Help with upgrading libflickrnet

Hi Mirco,

On Sat, 22 Aug, 2009 at 07:30:10PM +0200, Mirco Bauer wrote:
> Hi Varun,
> On Thu, 20 Aug 2009 21:51:56 -0400
> Varun Hiremath <varun@debian.org> wrote:
> > Hi Micro,
> I am not that small *cough*

I am extremely sorry about that typo.

> > Hmm.. but, won't the old 2.1.5 binary package be removed from the
> > archive once we upload this new version, since the source package name
> > is the same? 
> Yes, the archive admins are regularly running cleanup processes that
> will remove binary packages that are not build by and source package.
> This is expected and still will allow a smooth upgrade path for all
> users that have the old version installed and now can install the new
> version without the need of waiting for a completed transition.
> Renaming a library package introduces implicitly a transition, all
> rdeps have to be rebuild (and updated build-deps in our case).

Ok, in that case since all the rdeps: f-spot, dfo and gnome-do-plugins
are under the pkg-cli-apps team, can I upload this new version to
unstable and then update these rdeps accordingly? Should I do some
other tests before uploading libflickrnet2.2-cil to unstable. 

I already built dfo and f-spot with the new version and there weren't
any problems but I'm not sure about runtime issues.

> > Could you please point me to some policy page which
> > explains this upgrade process for binary package name change? I
> > couldn't find anything on Google.
> That's a good question, I don't know any that covers the library
> transitioning part. The simple rename case is described here though:
> http://www.debian.org/doc/developers-reference/pkgs.html#s5.9.3

Thanks, I actually looked at that section, but I wasn't sure if it was
referring to change in source package name or binary package name.


Reply to: