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

Re: saga in gdal transition tracker

On 01-09-15 20:00, Johan Van de Wauw wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 1, 2015 at 3:57 PM, Sebastiaan Couwenberg wrote:
>> There is no error, both libvigraimpex & saga have been binNMUed for the
>> ongoing transitions they're involved in. This has allowed saga to build
>> now despite the libvigraimpex transition not having started yet.
> Ok, bin-nmu's are different on debian and ubuntu, I expected a
> changelog entry such as here:
> https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/saga/2.2.0+dfsg-1build2

The binNMUes in Debian are much less visible yes. The changelog is
modified though, you can find those when inspecting the binary package:

$ debdiff /tmp/libsaga_2.2.0+dfsg-1{,+b1}_amd64.deb
[The following lists of changes regard files as different if they have
different names, permissions or owners.]

Files in second .deb but not in first
-rw-r--r--  root/root   /usr/share/doc/libsaga/changelog.Debian.amd64.gz

Control files: lines which differ (wdiff format)
Depends: libc6 (>= 2.14), libgcc1 (>= 1:4.1.1), libgomp1 (>= 4.9),
 libhpdf-2.2.1, libstdc++6 (>= [-4.9), libwxbase3.0-0-] {+5.2),
 libwxbase3.0-0v5+} (>= 3.0.2+dfsg),
 [-libwxgtk3.0-0-] {+libwxgtk3.0-0v5+} (>= 3.0.2+dfsg)
Installed-Size: [-1942-] {+1867+}
Source: saga {+(2.2.0+dfsg-1)+}
Version: [-2.2.0+dfsg-1-] {+2.2.0+dfsg-1+b1+}

This architecture specific changelog contains the binNMU changes:

$ zcat /tmp/libsaga/usr/share/doc/libsaga/changelog.Debian.amd64.gz
saga (2.2.0+dfsg-1+b1) sid; urgency=low, binary-only=yes

  * Binary-only non-maintainer upload for amd64; no source changes.
  * Rebuild for libgdal1i/libstdc++6 transitions.

 -- amd64 / i386 Build Daemon (babin) <buildd-babin@buildd.debian.org>
Fri, 17 Jul 2015 18:07:41 +0200

> On the libstdc++ transition tracker saga still shows up red. Does this
> mean that another library on which saga depends has not yet made the
> transition?

No, it just means there are saga packages in unstable that don't match
the is_good criterea of the tracker configuration:

 Good: .depends ~ /libstdc\+\+6 \(>= 5/
 Bad: .depends ~ /libstdc\+\+6(,|$)|libstdc\+\+6 \(>= [234]/

Only packages that use symbols introduced in GCC 5.x will match the Good
criterea, shapelib for example doesn't require newer symbols but has
been rebuilt with GCC5, it still depends on libstdc++6 (>= 4.1.1)
because that's all that Shape_PointInPoly contrib utility uses.

For saga, there are still old packages left in the archive, those are
the ones still marked as bad. These are the dependencies of the old
(pre-GCC5) and new (binNMUed) libsaga:

Package: libsaga
Source: saga (2.2.0+dfsg-1)
Version: 2.2.0+dfsg-1+b1
Depends: libc6 (>= 2.14), libgcc1 (>= 1:4.1.1), libgomp1 (>= 4.9),
 libhpdf-2.2.1, libstdc++6 (>= 5.2), libwxbase3.0-0v5 (>= 3.0.2+dfsg),
 libwxgtk3.0-0v5 (>= 3.0.2+dfsg)

Package: libsaga
Source: saga
Version: 2.2.0+dfsg-1
Depends: libc6 (>= 2.14), libgcc1 (>= 1:4.1.1), libgomp1 (>= 4.9),
 libhpdf-2.2.1, libstdc++6 (>= 4.9), libwxbase3.0-0 (>= 3.0.2+dfsg),
 libwxgtk3.0-0 (>= 3.0.2+dfsg)

When old packages are still marked as bad in the transition tracker this
is usually caused by reverse dependencies not being rebuilt with the new
library yet and therefor still depends on the old version keeping it in
the archive. It can also be caused by missing builds on one or more of
the ports. This seems to be the case now, the cruft reports old saga
builds on hurd, see:


Kind Regards,


 GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1

Reply to: