On Sat, Nov 03, 2012 at 06:45:58PM +0100, Joachim Breitner wrote: > Hi Iustin, > > Am Samstag, den 03.11.2012, 11:08 +0100 schrieb Iustin Pop: > > I wanted to upgrade to the packages from experimental, but it things are > > not very straightforward. > > thanks for testing this. Luckily, this is experimental, so we have an > excuse ;-) > > > Some packages have not been rebuilt against experimental, so they have > > to be removed. E.g. haskell-hslogger. Can I just update their > > dependencies/rebuild/dput to experimental? > > Yes, please do. As said before, I was only working on the packages in > the Darcs repositories; hslogger is not among them. > > If you do, makes sure you build-depend on the version of > haskell-devscripts in experimental and double-check that you get the > distribution right. OK. I saw that we don't use special version numbers for experimental, so something like this should be enough, right? diff --git a/debian/changelog b/debian/changelog index 65ca6b3..4139825 100644 --- a/debian/changelog +++ b/debian/changelog @@ -1,3 +1,9 @@ +hslogger (1.1.4+dfsg1-3) experimental; urgency=low + + * Rebuild for experimental (bump dependency on haskell-devscripts) + + -- Iustin Pop <iustin@debian.org> Sat, 03 Nov 2012 23:55:54 +0100 + hslogger (1.1.4+dfsg1-2) unstable; urgency=low * Sourceful upload to rebuild documentation package diff --git a/debian/control b/debian/control index 3a2f108..a5e8270 100644 --- a/debian/control +++ b/debian/control @@ -4,7 +4,7 @@ Maintainer: Debian Haskell Group <pkg-haskell-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.o Uploaders: John Goerzen <jgoerzen@complete.org> Build-Depends: debhelper (>= 7), cdbs, - haskell-devscripts (>= 0.8), + haskell-devscripts (>= 0.8.13), cpphs, ghc, ghc-prof, @@ -80,4 +80,3 @@ Description: The Haskell Logging Framework, API Documentation has a syslog handler built in. . This package contains the API documentation. > > Some packages have been upgraded to a newer version after the big > > initial upload, leading to their reverse deps being uninstallable. E.g. > > ibghc-conduit-dev (base dependency of many pkgs) depends on > > libghc-void-dev-0.5.5.1-04fe7, however we now have libghc-void-dev-0.5.8 > > which makes all conduit stuff uninstallable. I guess uploading new > > versions to experimental must be done carefully? > > Actually, this is something that would happen in unstable just as well. > There, once someone notices a problem I’d run ./haskell-pkg-debcheck to > schedule the required binNMUs. I need to create a variant of this tool > that is capable of handling experimental. I guess I’ll do that now. I see. I'm not familiar with this process; it's good that it requires only binNMUs though. On Sat, Nov 03, 2012 at 08:03:09PM +0100, Joachim Breitner wrote: > Hi, > > Am Samstag, den 03.11.2012, 18:45 +0100 schrieb Joachim Breitner: > > I need to create a variant of this tool > > that is capable of handling experimental. I guess I’ll do that now. > > done and scheduled. Wow, so fast :) I see under https://buildd.debian.org/status/package.php?p=haskell-conduit&suite=experimental that the amd64 builder already rebuilt the package, I guess I only need to wait a bit until it's appearing on the mirrors? Side-comment: I wonder why the other experimental builders didn't pick this up? For example, https://buildd.debian.org/status/architecture.php?a=i386&suite=experimental doesn't show haskell-conduit in either BD-Uninstallable or Needs-Build, so I wonder if we only do the experimental stuff for amd64? Not that I complain at all, that's perfectly fine for me :) thanks a lot, iustin
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature