Re: gratuitous -dev package renaming
On Sun, 12 Feb 2006 00:56:22 -0800, Steve Langasek <vorlon@debian.org> said:
> Are there really differences in the new version that warrant forcing
> sourceful changes in all of the reverse-dependencies? If not, I'm
> inclined to NMU gnustep-base and gnustep-gui to Provide: the old names
> of these -dev packages and schedule binNMUs for the affected packages,
> so that this gnustep transition doesn't continue to drag on.
Err. Sorry, I should have caught this at first. For most (for some
value of "most") packages, a binNMU is not enough. Due to the changed
file locations, most packages would need their debian/rules modified to
add "gsdh_gnustep" in the binary-* targets. Otherwise, they may not be
installable (if they have any files in the relocated directories).
AFAICT, though, most applications should be alright (though they should
probably add gsdh_gnustep anyways, in case they later include files in
the relocated directories).
--
Hubert Chan <hubert@uhoreg.ca> - http://www.uhoreg.ca/
PGP/GnuPG key: 1024D/124B61FA
Fingerprint: 96C5 012F 5F74 A5F7 1FF7 5291 AF29 C719 124B 61FA
Key available at wwwkeys.pgp.net. Encrypted e-mail preferred.
Reply to: