Re: libraries being removed from the archive
On Sun, Aug 03, 2003 at 05:31:37PM -0400, christophe barbe wrote:
> You are kidding right?
>
> I have not removed an old library, I have uploaded a newer upstream with
> a different soname. That's the way it works, a new library is uploaded,
> then packages using it are rebuilt and when they are all ready they
> migrate in testing.
>
> As the gphoto2 maintainer, I don't remember getting mails from you
> announcing an upcoming libusb package with a new soname. Perhaps that's
> because I was waiting for a few months to get a working one for our
> powerpc users.
>
> IMHO we need to make an addition to the policy stating that not being an
> asshole on the mailing-list is welcome. I don't remember sending mails
> to the mailing list when the libusb packaging was broken for a few
> months, but I do remember sending you polite mails.
>
> For you information, some packages using libexif need libexif9.
> I agree that I could (should) have sent a prior notice before uploading it
> (more than a week ago, BEFORE your kdegraphics upload), but that's not
> an excuse to be an asshole.
>
> Christophe
You aren't the only one that has broken things, many other people
including myself have as well, I most notably with libvorbis ;). However,
this libusb soname change you mention last happened on Feb 27 2002,
which was changed due to a RC bug regarding its naming. (BTW libusb's
soname is odd, which is why I didn't catch it sooner). Also you mention
that libusb was broken for several months, which is true, but it was
only broken on one arch (powerpc). Also, from what I can tell from
looking back at it by the time you determined it wasn't a bug in
gphoto2 you NMU'd it within a week. I don't recall if I was actually
aware of the bug before you NMU'd it.
Also, I was not stating that libexif9 should not be uploaded, only that
old libraries should not be removed from the archive until they are no
longer used, which apparently was not the case for libexif8. I don't
recall if I stated this earlier but each time I have uploaded KDE in the
past several months it has been broken by library removals within about
a week and recompiling KDE sources is not light work for the buildds.
Seriously, if we want to ever release sarge we are going to need to stop
making libraries disappear, every time we rebuild something it takes
another 10 days for it to migrate into testing and everything that
depends on it is also pushed back another 10 days. Even if the person
causing the breakage NMU's all the affected packages it still causes
them to wait another 10 days to migrate, and causes unneeded load on
the buildds, possibly with the packages no longer being able to be
built since gcc 3.3 is so anal now. (/me wonders how many RC bugs are
around just for gcc 3.3 related crap)
BTW - For those wondering Woody was released over a year ago...
Thanks,
Chris Cheney
PS - I apologize for sounding like an asshole, however this general
problem really does need fixing.
Reply to: