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

Re: libgtop2 fixed packages available (solves applet mess).

On Sun, Jun 08, 2003 at 12:29:35PM -0400, Colin Walters wrote:
> On Sun, 2003-06-08 at 10:03, Sven Luther wrote:
> > First a quick hack to make the libraries be included again, then fixing
> > all the rest of the mess, and then we can do cosmetic improvement.
> The soname isn't cosmetic.  In theory third-party software (outside of
> Debian) might be using libgtop, and a soname change would break that.

Err, i was responding to the part about installing the library in the
package, which is currently done by doing a cp libgtop.0.so.0*, and whic
i hacked to do a libgtop.0.so.1*, which Christian found not to be a nice
solution, because it would break next time the soname did change. I
agree with him, but doing it like that or with a more propper fix is a
cosmetic change in the current situation, and should have been cleaned
up once Noel has time again to aknoledge my NMU, if i did one.

> >  Also,
> > remember, i am not the upstream author, i don't really think it is my
> > place to do extensive changes in the libgtop2 packaging.
> What you should do is take the old version and just apply the diff from
> src/daemon/gnuserv.c to fix the buffer overflow.

I don't really know, you mean i should take the working 2.0.1-4 package,
add an epoch to the package name, apply the fix, and upload that, even
if there has already been a 2.0.2-1 in the archive, which caused all
this problem. I don't really like using epochs, and forcing an epoch
upgrade by a NMU sound kind of rude to me, i don't want to do that.

Maybe i could do what you suggest, and upload a 2.0.2.is_really_2.0.1-0.1
and let Noel to sort this out when he looks at the package again. This
way, the NMU would not impose irreversible changes to the package like
the epoch would, and Noel can sort things up when he is back.

That said, libgtop2's build is still horribly broken, even if Christian
thinks it is a libtool feature that breaks it.

I don't really care of doing complicated shared lib/soname packaging,
the package is fixed on my box, and i am slowly running out of time to
do debian work this WE, so by all means, if someone else has a better
idea, go ahead and do the NMU.


Sven Luther

Reply to: