On Mon, Mar 14, 2005 at 07:45:06PM -0800, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote: > Steve Langasek <vorlon@debian.org> writes: > > Can you explain what the needed change was that required an SONAME bump > > here? > I don't know the details. I didn't call for it; it's gtkhtml that > did. Since there are only two packages using the library, and it's a > crufty old gnome-1 thing anyway, I wouldn't mind punting the upload I > did and uploading under the old name, even though that would be > technically wrong and might break users who actually have linked > against it. I find it extremely unlikely that this would actually > happen, but rather than run the risk, I followed the rules. Er, if the library's soname changed, then uploading the package under the existing name is a non-starter -- libgtkhtml20 shipped with stable, so this would unacceptably break partial upgrades from woody. > > Given the preceding happiness involving gnucash, I must say that I'm not > > enthusiastic about seeing another round of updates of this package for > > sarge, particularly when it's bound up with updates of 2-3 other > > packages. :) > 1) First, gnucash gets built. > 2) Second, gnucash, grisbi, and libofx migrate into testing. This > would be a releasable state. > 3) Then I build gnucash against the new gtkhtml. > If number (3) produces a gnucash with "problems", then that's ok; > number (2) is still releasable (unlike what we have now, which has a > grave bug capable of causing data-loss in an accounting package). > Because gnucash is being hosed by its incorrect priority (extra), > number (2) won't happen until the buildds have caught up. Which means > number (3) would be able to proceed without any serious problems, > provided the ftpmasters have installed gtkhtml by that point. > What can we do to help the ftpmasters out with the backlog in NEW > processing? Since arm is single-handedly blocking a large number of RC bugfixes at this point, I've begun pushing in relevant packages that are only waiting on arm. The fixed gnucash package should go in tomorrow or the next day (depending on whether I got the hint syntax right on the first try). Once that's done, 3) shouldn't be a problem. -- Steve Langasek postmodern programmer
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature