Re: Bug#414124: linux-ntfs is not binNMU safe (was: Upload of fuse to t-p-u, binNMUs required)
On Fri, Mar 09, 2007 at 11:29:57AM +0100, Frank Küster wrote:
> >> 2. linux-ntfs
> >> builds lots of binary packages, but there is only one with
> >> interdependencies:
> >> Package: libntfs9
> >> Section: libs
> >> Architecture: any
> >> Depends: ${shlibs:Depends}
> >> ...
> >> Package: libntfs-dev
> >> Section: libdevel
> >> Architecture: any
> >> Depends: libntfs9 (= ${Source-Version})
> If linux-ntfs were bin-NMU'ed, libntfs9 and libntfs-dev would be present
> with version 1.13.1-6.0.1, but libntfs-dev would depend on libntfs9 ( =
1.13.1-6+b1, not 1.13.1-6.0.1. (surely this is documented everywhere by
now?)
> 1.13.1-6). The changes to make it binNMU safe are described on
> http://wiki.debian.org/binNMU.
(well, it's at least documented on the page you referenced. :)
> This would mean to use the following patch
<snip>
looks good to me.
> > The udeb isn't an /immediate/ problem, that I can see. We could even get
> > away with having just the one package left in etch with wrong deps, if it
> > came to that. If you want this fixed, though, please coordinate with the
> > maintainer to get uploads to both unstable and testing-proposed-updates
> > fixing the ${Source-Version} dependency. Integration into etch will still
> > be subject to Frans's approval.
> The upload to t-p-u is necessary because fuse in sid has a new upstream
> version, and a package compiled against this version cannot propagate to
> etch. vorlon suggested version numbers 1.13.1-7 for unstable and
> 1.13.1-6+etch1 for testing-proposed-updates. I think -7 must be
> uploaded first.
Yes. (Was that the only question?)
--
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: