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

Bug#891395: marked as done (libfabric1: improperly packaged library support files)

Your message dated Mon, 03 Sep 2018 22:31:44 +0200
with message-id <7ad783c5d26395747dfb8b9e53712664@dogguy.org>
and subject line Re: Bug#891395: marked as done (libfabric1: improperly packaged library support files)
has caused the Debian Bug report #891395,
regarding libfabric1: improperly packaged library support files
to be marked as done.

This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.

(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact owner@bugs.debian.org

891395: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=891395
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact owner@bugs.debian.org with problems
--- Begin Message ---
Package: libfabric1
Version: 1.5.3-1
Severity: serious
Justification: policy 8.2

libfabric1 ships /usr/bin/fi_{info,pingpong,strerror}. These files are
independent of the soname of the library. Debian policy section 8.2
prohibits such files from being shipped in the shared library package.
The typical solution is to split them out into a package named e.g.
libfabric-bin. Thus when libfabric bumps its soname, libfabric-bin would
get taken over by the newer package while libfabric1 and e.g. libfabric2
would remain coinstallable.


--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Version: 1.6.1-5

On 2018-06-19 11:58, Roland Fehrenbacher wrote:
"M" == Mehdi Dogguy <mehdi@dogguy.org> writes:

Hi Mehdi,

    M> Control: reopen -1 Hi Roland,

    M> If I am not mistaken, your last upload moves files across binary
    M> packages but doesn't add necessary Breaks/Replaces. In the
    M> current state, upgrades are broken because older libfabric1 and
    M> newer libfabric-dev are not co-installable.

fixed, thanks for noticing quickly.

Then marking this bug as such...

Something else: Could you please
delete the patch-queue/debian/master branch of the salsa libfabric
repo. It's totally out of sync and not easily fixable. Then I can add
your latest patch to it too.

Anyone in the team should be able to do that. As for patch-queue/* branches, I'd vote for not publishing them. They are useful locally. It takes only a few seconds to rebuild them. What's the point of publishing them? (especially
when you know that they should be rebased/rebuilt often).




--- End Message ---

Reply to: