Since this discussion in 2005: http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2005/05/msg01085.html binutils has got a shlibs file that specifies a tight dependency on the current upstream version. Thus frequent binNMUs of any packages linking dynamically against libbfd or libopcodes are needed, or those packages will hold back binutils from migrating, as is the case right now, but there should hopefully at least be no breakage. I just want to check that the prohibition in the package description of binutils-dev ("Note that building Debian packages which depend on the shared libbfd is Not Allowed") is still in force and that doko hasn't just forgotten about it. In that (former) case I'm volunteering to fix the offending packages (lush and nitpic) and close the bugs my friend Niels opened. (It does seem a bit pointless to help packages that link dynamically that much if it's forbidden, but on the other hand binutils is definitely not a proper library package.) -- Magnus Holmgren firstname.lastname@example.org Debian Developer
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.