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

Re: New Version of osm-gps-map nearly ready



On 11/27/2015 01:30 AM, Sebastiaan Couwenberg wrote:
> 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.

Thanks Bas. My sid VM was busted, so that wasted yesterday evening.
Unfortunately I am busy today and tomorrow, so I will take a look at
that and your commits on Sunday probably. I need to study what you did
with the symbols to better prepare for my promise to draft something for
the policy (something to do at Christmas!).

After I pushed and went to bed the other night, I realised that I should
probably look into whether we still need the "Provides". That was done
earlier when creepy & subsurface were also Reverse Dependencies. But I
will re-look in the light of what you say about the package names (both
Andreas and I thought it was overly complicated way back anyway).

Cheers,

Ross

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


Reply to: