Re: Recompilation to remove dependency on libc6 2.0.7u (Was: Status of Slink
In article <199812091406.PAA05905@faui22c.informatik.uni-erlangen.de>, Roman Hodek <Roman.Hodek@informatik.uni-erlangen.de> writes:
>> Perhaps a better thing to do would be to just recompile for i386 only,
>> and do binary-only point releases for affected packages, ie,
>> $ cd package-3.14
>> $ debchange -v
>> # frozen, "binary-only / recompile to fix libc6 dependency"
>> $ build -b -rfakeroot
>> $ cd ..
>> $ dupload -t master whatever.changes
> And how do you want to tell the build daemons (extreme case) that this
> "point release" is i386 only? You can't determine this from the
> version number... The only solution would be to make uploads without
> sources (i.e., "Architecture: i386" only). Is this the sense of build
> -b? (I don't know this tool.)
Yes, basically, 'dpkg-buildpackage -B' is what is is called for, AFAIK.
> But this solution makes problem with the source availability
> problem, discussed some time ago on debian-policy. Then we have a
> lot of binary versions (for i386 only) for which no corresponding
> source version exists.
Why couldn't we do binary-i386 only uploads with *no* version number
bump? The problem of versions w/o source wouldn't exist. The upgrade
problem is a non-problem, since if they have pkg X.Y installed
already, they don't *need* X.Y w/o the libc dependancy by definition.
I don't think 'dinstall' could deal with this (IMHO it would not want
to reinstall the same version twice into the archive) -- but a little
temporary disabling of this check maybe couldn't hurt.
Alternatively, isn't there a way to number an upload as an
arch-specific upload, as understood by wanna-build & co? I.e.,
.....Adam Di Carlo....adam@onShore.com.....<URL:http://www.onShore.com/>