Re: Question about removal of cyrus-sasl2-mit
On Mon, Dec 11, 2006 at 11:37:05PM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote:
> >> My guess is that it would be better for the new package to take care of
> >> it, since otherwise we're carrying around an old source package as well
> >> as a transitional binary package. That seems unnecessary.
> > The only thing that scares me is the NEW processing for the transitional
> > package, which would be avoided by using the old source package to
> > create the transitional binary package. This is probably an irrational
> > fear. :)
> As I recall (and this surprised me too), if you add a transitional package
> that matches the name of a binary package currently provided by another
> source package, there's no NEW approval required.
Indeed, so I think re-adding a libsasl2-gssapi-mit binary package to
cyrus-sasl2 would be the best option. Is this in progress?
Cheers,
--
Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS
Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world.
vorlon@debian.org http://www.debian.org/
Reply to: