Re: gratuitous -dev package renaming
On Wed, 15 Feb 2006 02:01:55 -0800, Steve Langasek <vorlon@debian.org> said:
> On Sun, Feb 12, 2006 at 10:45:42PM -0700, Hubert Chan wrote:
>> 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).
> Ok, then I'll definitely avoid meddling with those packages, thanks.
> (Though addresses-for-gnustep already got meddled with, and was
> probably one of those affected, hmm...)
Yes, I think it is. Well, a new package is already uploaded, and has
been waiting in NEW for a while. We'll see how long it takes to get
approved.
>> However, due to the directory structure changes for FHS compliance,
>> none of the new -dev packages can be installed at the same time as
>> any of the old -dev packages. For example, if someone has
>> libgnustep-gui0.9-dev (old) installed, which depends on
>> libgnustep-base1.10-dev (old), and this pulls in
>> libgnustep-base1.11-dev (new) because it provides
>> libgnustep-base1.10-dev, then bad things will happen.
>> But I would gladly welcome suggestions on how to fix this if you have
>> any ideas.
> Well, the solution that comes immediately to mind is for the new -dev
> packages to conflict with those incompatible, old versions of -dev
> packages which depended on them; e.g., libgnustep-base1.11-dev
> Conflicts: libgnustep-gui0.9-dev (<< 0.10.2-1). Normally, versioned
> less-than conflicts are discouraged because they complicate upgrades,
> but for -dev packages I don't think that's a problem.
I guess this is academic now, since it looks like we're actually on
track for a completed transition soonish (modulo waiting for the NEW
queue). But I'll keep that in mind for the next time, if we run into
the same problem again.
I assume that if libgnustep-base1.11-dev Conflicts:
libgnustep-gui0.9-dev (<< 0.10.2-1), it won't prevent
libgnustep-gui0.10-dev from being installed, even if it Provides:
libgnustep-gui0.9-dev (since it doesn't declare a version)?
>> I also have a list somewhere of packages that should be removed,
>> since they are not being used and we have lost their maintainer. I
>> hope to be able to send that to -release (? or where is the proper
>> place to send it?) soon.
> Packages that should be removed completely should be reported as bugs
> against the ftp.debian.org pseudopackage.
OK, thanks. I'll do that.
>> Thank you, Steve, for that much-needed kick in the pants.
> Thanks for replying and letting me know where things stand. I look
> forward to seeing these various RC bugs closed in uploads in the
> coming days. :)
Well, part of that depends on the NEW queue... ;)
--
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: