Bug#833909: RFS: xml-security-c/1.7.3-3~bpo7+1 [BPO]
Gianfranco Costamagna <locutusofborg@debian.org> writes:
> the library has been renamed and conflicting with the non-v5 version, because
> of the libstdc++ transition.
>
> backporting to jessie and wheezy (where the transition didn't happen), means
> you have to revert that change, because otherwise the package will be uninstallable
> with all of the reverse dependencies, because of:
>
> Package: libxml-security-c17v5
> Conflicts:
> libxml-security-c17,
> Replaces:
> libxml-security-c17,
>
> in this case, oldstable has the library with a different soname (c16),
> so I'm not sure if the rename is worth the effort or not, please ask
> on -mentors, -devel or wherever you find more appropriate.
It'd probably make sense to start with a jessie backport, where this
change is necessary, then branch off the wheezy backport from that, and
do the PKG_INSTALLDIR change only.
> also, can the new patch be added to the package in unstable too?
> - * [aba87f7] New patch Remove-PKG_INSTALLDIR-to-build-with-older-pkg-config.patch
In principle it could, but it was added in the latest revision with the
very purpose of getting it tested before upstreaming.
--
Feri
Reply to: