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

Re: Bug#116727: How to go about transition in libexpat1


Thanks for helping in solving this indeed messy situation.

Junichi Uekawa (dancer@netfort.gr.jp) wrote:
> Hi, 
> I was thinking about this transition (messy one), and this is my proposed "solution" to the problem,
> if the package name / soname needs to stay this way.

I think it's best to leave everything as it is and clean up the mess.

> Now some packages have done the transition (i.e. rebuilt against the newer libs), and some 
> others have not.
> This is an inconsistency that "testing" cannot detect.
> (But this makes me think, is it really the best way to do it?)
> Thus I propose the following:
> File "serious" bugs on each of the packages which depend on 
> libexpat1, to build against libexpat1-dev, and 
> build-depend on later version of libexpat1-dev.

This should probably be "grave"; "serious" is for policy violations.

> Add versioned Conflicts: to libexpat1, 
> so that it won't be installed alongside with the packages which are
> compiled against older libexpat1.

I'll upload an adapted version of libexpat1 (need to close the bug
officially anyway).

[snip list of packages]
I'll start filing the bug reports.

Ardo van Rangelrooij
home email: ardo@debian.org
home page:  http://people.debian.org/~ardo
GnuPG fp:   3B 1F 21 72 00 5C 3A 73  7F 72 DF D9 90 78 47 F9

Reply to: