Hi Michael, On Wednesday 30 November 2005 22:00, Michael Koch wrote: > On Wed, Nov 30, 2005 at 08:08:15PM +0100, Stephan Hermann wrote: > > Well, I will try to revert the change, no problem. But even for > > libatlas-cpp-0.6 there was a soname change (if you see this bugreport > > about the rename of libatlas-cpp-0.5) and there was no need to rename > > libatlas-cpp-0.6 because the soname change was introduced by a new > > upstream source. > > > > When I got the merge report into my hands for libatlas-cpp-0.6, there was > > no renaming in rev 1, so I had to add c2a as soname change. I just saw > > too late, that there was a rev 2 of this package, and in this rev a > > renaming was made. > > > > At the time of the merge, I was right. There is now a difference between > > ubuntu and debian. I'm sorry for that, but I don't change it right now. > > If there is a new upstream of atlas-cpp, we can try to bring the two > > packages again in sync. > > Sorry for the trouble I made. My fault to not correctly reread the > transition mail again before doing the actual transition of atlas-cpp. > It's clearly my bug. What shall I do now? Rename the binary packages > again? Wait for a new upstream version (0.6.0) which changes the SONAME > again? 0.6.0rc2 is already out. Don't worry :) If new 0.6.0 upstream source will change the soname and the package is named to libatlas-cpp-0.7 then you can just conflicts/replaces to libatlas-cpp-0.6, libatlas-cpp-0.6c2, libatlas-cpp-0.6c2a, so ubuntu can sync it directly without any problems. we are then in sync again and avoid any serious troubles during updates. Actually what you can also do is to follow Matthias Kloses post from 2005-11-14 about the libstdc++ new allocator transition. You actually need to rename libatlas-cpp-0.6c2 to c2a so we are in sync as well.. If you want I can send you an accurate debdiff. Any objections? Regards, \sh
Attachment:
pgpvI3h_WzQXw.pgp
Description: PGP signature