Re: New Version of osm-gps-map nearly ready
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA512
Hi Ross,
On 25-11-15 23:27, Ross Gammon wrote:
> I have nearly finished a new upstream version of osmgpsmap (just
> pushed). I have run out of steam for today, but I thought I would
> push it anyway in case you would like to do (have time/energy to
> do) a quick review.
>
> Tomorrow I will do a test install, and do a final check of the
> packaging.
>
> It will need to go into experimental as there was a SONAME bump &
> there is at least one reverse dependency to check.
I don't expect breakage from the SONAME bump, only symbols added. As
long as none of the reverse dependencies rely on the removed YAHOO
sources. gnuais only uses the OPENSTREETMAP source, so that looks good.
codesearch found an embedded copy of osm-gps-maps in darktable, it may
be worthwhile to file a whishlist bug requesting to switch to the
packaged library (if it actually uses the sources it includes).
Since the package will have to pass NEW because of the SONAME bump,
additional renames are not an extra pain. Consider dropping the
SOVERSION from the -dev & -dbg packages again to no need renames of
these every SONAME bump. gnuais build depends on
libosmgpsmap-1.0-0-dev, so it will need a change before it can be
built with the new version also, might as well change to just
libosmgpsmap-1.0-dev.
The removal of m4/gtk-doc.m4 by debian/clean is annoying in
combination with git-buildpackage. The removal may not be required
when using plain autoconf, so consider switching to dh-autoreconf
because gnome-common is deprecated too:
https://wiki.gnome.org/Projects/GnomeCommon/Migration
Enabling parallel builds with dh $@ --parallel is a good idea too if
it doesn't break too many things.
Kind Regards,
Bas
- --
GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146 50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2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=GRxV
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Reply to: