Re: ITP: namazu2
On Fri, Feb 18, 2000 at 09:41:19PM +0900, Masato Taruishi wrote:
> 1. there is no source archive of libnmz2.
> i.e. I wonder whether this is legal for debian policy.
> at least 'no source' is GPL violation.
This kind of thing happens rather often in Debian, whenever a library's
SONAME is changed.
It is solved either by removing the old package and recompiling packages to
the new version, or by leaving the old package in oldlibs, but building it
from a new (actually, old :) renamed source package. Or anything else, as
long as its done quickly.
I think there should be only one namazu source package (whatever name it is
given, doesn't matter much) should include the latest version of the
upstream source. It should build a package containing the namazu executable,
called simply `namazu', and packages for whatever libraries it contains.
If the new version is renamed, and old package kept, users won't get the new
version when they try to upgrade. It seems there exist compatibility issues,
however, if they can be resolved by an automated process, do something like
this in the postinst script of the new version of the package:
if [ "$1" = "configure" -a "$2" ]; then
if dpkg --compare-versions $2 lt 2.0; then
<do whatever needed to to safely upgrade, and perhaps output a short
note about what is/was being done>
It should be fairly obvious what this does... knowing that the second
cmdline argument given to the configure script is the last configured
version of the package. See the Packaging manual, section 6.4.
Correct me if I'm wrong in anything above, of course :) I didn't see the
actual package, but I know the pattern...
BTW of course, the new version of the package may not be uploaded to frozen,
only to unstable distribution.
> There are some packages that adopt this way in Debian, such as TCL/TK.
The Tcl/Tk package names suck, IMHO. However, that may be an exception as it
is an interpreter...
enJoy -*/\*- don't even try to pronounce my first name