On Sun, 11 Apr 2010 17:36:58 +0200, Christian Hammers wrote: > The below quoted changelog entry is the lates in libdate-calc-perl's SVN. > > Apparently before 2009-10 the package included the XS backend and there > was a separate pure-perl backend available on CPAN but not Debian. Since > 2009-10 the package now contains the pure-perl backend as default and > the XS backend is available as separate CPAN package. Yup, that's my understanding too. > I would propose to simply stick with the authors choice of backend and > ship the Date::Calc package as it is available on CPAN. Ok. We can also additionally ship the -xs- package; in fact it's already in svn but I don't know in which state. _If_ we do this we have to be careful about getting the various dependency fields in both directions right. > Regarding the t/f000.t line, I'm not sure how to understand it. It is > possible to build and run "make test" of version 6.3 while having > 6.0-1 (with XS backend) installed. So the tests seem clever enough > to really test their own sources and not some XS code > from /usr/lib/perl. Sounds good, to be honest I don't remember exactly what caused my concerns there. But there's also another issue: > libdate-calc-perl (6.3-1) UNRELEASED; urgency=low > > - Q: what does "United "Date::Calc" and "Date::Pcalc" into a single > distribution" (and the changelog entry below) tell us? we have also > libdate-pcalc-perl Seems like we have to do the "dummy transitional package" + conflicts/replaces/provides + checking (versioned und unversioned) reverse dependencies dance here. My general memory is that noone took the time yet to sort it all out, not that there are any problems in general. Cheers, gregor -- .''`. http://info.comodo.priv.at/ -- GPG key IDs: 0x8649AA06, 0x00F3CFE4 : :' : Debian GNU/Linux user, admin, & developer - http://www.debian.org/ `. `' Member of VIBE!AT & SPI, fellow of Free Software Foundation Europe `- NP: Rigmor Gustafsson: Black Coffee
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature