Re: sp new version [was Re: HAMM FREEZE IS ONE WEEK AWAY]
"Christian" == Christian Leutloff <leutloff@sundancer.oche.de> writes:
> <apharris@onshore.com> writes:
> Are you now working on a new jade package!?
Yes, 1.1.
> Jade (1.0.93) is working out of the box on my system. I've used the
> diffs from the old jade and it works pretty fine. Are you going to
> release two packages from the same source, ie. source: jade, binary:
> sp, jade !?
Yes, for jade-1.1-1 I released one package, jade-1.1-1, which
conflicts/replaces/provides sp. Then I got a chorus of very
reasonable complaints, so I'm going to release a new jade later today
which only depends on sp (unversioned, for now), and out of that one
jade source package produces both jade and sp binary packages.
Here's what the versions will be:
sp-1.3-1.1-2 (around 1.6MB)
jade-1.1-2 (around .6MB)
Note due to the way the dependancies have changed, if you installed my
jade-1.1-1, you're going to need to install the new jade first, then
the new sp, then do a couple of configures to get them setup. Sorry!
I don't know any way around this.
Next I'm going to look to have sp use shared libs to try to bring the
size of the package down and bring the system more in line with our
vision of using shlibs whenever we can (where feasbile).
Also, I need to look into how tightly jade depends on sp. Right now,
since my jade seems to work with a rather old (1.1) sp suite, I'm not
versioning the jade depends. Any comments on this from jade experts
would be appreciated.
.....A. P. Harris...apharris@onShore.com...<URL:http://www.onShore.com/>
--
E-mail the word "unsubscribe" to debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST. Trouble? E-mail to listmaster@debian.org .
Reply to: