Re: libgtop2 NMU and advice asked.
On Sun, Jun 08, 2003 at 10:22:51PM +0900, Junichi Uekawa wrote:
> > > The normal procedure is to rename the binary package to
> > > libgtop2-1 (it should probably have been libgtop2.0-1, but
> > > people seem to have their own tastes about this.)
> > Ok, thanks for the info, and what is the procedure concerning this and
> > NMUs ? Also, while this name change mean the package will linger in NEW
> > for days, and not fix the corresponding RC bug during all this time ?
> You can revert to the old package using an epoch so that it goes
> back to a known good version first, if you are pedantic,
I would not take the responsability of adding an epoch in a NMU.
> but I don't think it's worth it, since you are uploading a new package
> into unstable.
> It's unfortunate but that's the price of being non-attentive when
> packaging libraries.
But then, Christian hinted that the soname change was not warranted, and
should be reverted instead.
> There are tools to address that issue, such as d-shlibs,
> which gives out errors when things don't look right.
> > > And then noting each maintainer to recompile against the new package,
> > > and optionally doing a mass-NMU and uploading to DELAYED queue...
> > So, doing it the hard way. Could anyone provide me a script or something
> > to get all the problematix packages ? Would a apt-cache rdepends be
> > enough for this :
> I think that would be enough.
> It would be obvious after the new package is installed, because they
> will be uninstallable in unstable.