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

Re: No libtiff transition for sarge

On 2004-08-08 Adrian Bunk <bunk@fs.tum.de> wrote:
> Just a note from an outsider in case someone hasn't already noted the 
> obvious:

> Unless the release managers drop their current release plan and revert 
> the base freeze, the libtiff transition can't get into sarge [1].

Why? Which base packages depend on libtiff?

> This means that fixes for packages depending directly or indirectly on 
> libtiff (e.g. via depending on libgtk2.0-0) that aren't already in  
> testing have to go through testing-proposed-updates.

No. Only base is frozen. Neither libtiff nor libgtk2.0-0 are in base.

> It's therefore also impossible for packages like Gimp 2 or XEmacs to be  
> included in Debian 3.1 [4].

Neither Gimp 2 nor XEmacs are in base.

> [1] OK, you could upload half of GNOME recompiled against an older 
>     libgpg-error0

Nicely spotted. Seems like libgpg-error0 somehow missed radar, another
case for tpu, imho.

> and other packages recompiled against older versions 
>     of e.g. slang1 to testing-proposed-updates [2], but that definitely 
>     takes more time than dropping the current freeze.

Remind me to shoot the slang maintainer, nothing in the changelogs for
1.4.9dbs-5 and 1.4.9dbs-4 explains why he bumped the shlibs file from
libslang 1-UTF8 slang1a-utf8 (>> 1.4.6-dbs-2)
in 1.4.9dbs-3 to
libslang 1-UTF8 slang1a-utf8 (>> 1.4.9dbs-4)
in 1.4.9dbs-5.

The sourcepackage does not explain this either, afaict there was no
change in the ABI at all.

> [2] Additionally, gnutls11 would have to be unfrozen and recompiled
>     with the internal libtasn1 [3].

gnutls11 is scheduled for special case handling anyway, iirc.
            cu andreas
"See, I told you they'd listen to Reason," [SPOILER] Svfurlr fnlf,
fuhggvat qbja gur juveyvat tha.
Neal Stephenson in "Snow Crash"

Reply to: