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

Re: Intent to Backport of cryptokit


thanks for the reply.

Romain Beauxis schrieb:
>> For your information: I intent to make a backport of cryptokit for
>> etch-backports to support a backport of sks.
> Backporting ocaml related package can be a real pain when it comes to buildds' 
> resolution of the build-dependencies.
> I advise you to version each ocaml dependency that you would need.
> Also, you should decide wether you want to use ocaml from etch-backports or 
> ocaml from etch. In case you want/need to compile against the latest 
> backported ocaml package, you should also backport all modules from etch that 
> have not been backported against this version. At least, I can see 
> libcryptokit-ocaml-dev in this case.

This is the module what I need for sks. libcryptokit-ocaml-dev is part
of cryptokit.

> Also, if you backport a module that depends on another module that is in both 
> backports and stable, you should version the dependency or the module from 
> etch will be pulled, leading to a build-dep resolution failure.

cryptokit in testing has a specific dependency on ocaml-nox (>=
3.10.0-8), which I don't have to change.

> By the way, I would propose that we don't backport ocaml unless there is a 
> major reason for doing it. This would really ease all other backports, and 
> release the need to backport *all* stable ocaml modules against the 
> backported ocaml.

ocaml itself is in backports with version 3.10.1-1~bpo40+3. So there is
no work to do.

The backport of cryptokit just involved calling debuild. The package
compiled fine. It is pending an upload.


Christoph Martin, Leiter der EDV der Verwaltung, Uni-Mainz, Germany
 Internet-Mail:  Christoph.Martin@Verwaltung.Uni-Mainz.DE
  Telefon: +49-6131-3926337
      Fax: +49-6131-3922856

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Reply to: