On Sun, Aug 22, 2010 at 00:21:39 -0400, Roberto C. Sánchez wrote: > Release Team, > > I would like to request pre-approval to upload cyrus-sasl2 > (2.1.23.dfsg1-6) to sid, with the goal of having it migrate to squeeze. > Please note that a very important point about this request is that the > -6 package would have to pass through NEW. > It's not clear to me why it would need that. All binary packages already exist in the archive overrides. [...] > Today, thanks to the avilability of the heimdal-multidev and > krb5-multidev packages, it is possible to have the MIT and Heimdal > Kerberos -dev libraries concurrently installed. This makes it possible > to build against both from within one source package. > > Merging the two source packages into one would eliminate both of these > issues. Having both of these issues persist through the life of Squeeze > would, IMHO, be a Bad Thing(TM). > Seems like a rather good idea to me. Now a few questions on the details (not necessarily problems, just thoughts I had while looking over the diff): > README.Debian-NMU | 11 -- > changelog | 9 + > control | 29 +++++ Can you explain why cyrus-sasl2-heimdal-dbg needs to depend on cyrus-sasl2-dbg? > cyrus-sasl2-heimdal-dbg.postrm | 10 + > cyrus-sasl2-heimdal-dbg.preinst | 10 + Is the name /usr/lib/sasl2/libgssapiv2.so.2.0.23 stable? If not it seems easy for this to get out of sync with the actual file name. > libsasl2-modules-gssapi-heimdal.dirs | 2 Seems like these directories would get created by dh_install/dh_lintian anyway. Is this necessary? > libsasl2-modules-gssapi-heimdal.install | 1 > libsasl2-modules-gssapi-heimdal.lintian-overrides | 2 > patches/0024_allow_detection_of_heimdal.dpatch | 22 ++++ That patch looks like a kludge around a broken configure check for GSS_C_NT_HOSTBASED_SERVICE. Can you explain it a bit more? > patches/00list | 1 > rules | 114 ++++++++++++++++------ May I suggest to put the common configure flags for the two variants in a variable, both so it's easier to see the differences and so they don't diverge by mistake in the future? The "run make, expect failure, run make again" thing is... interesting :) The dh_install calls are a bit weird, mixing -s, -pfoo and -Nbar args. > sample/Makefile | 7 - > 12 files changed, 172 insertions(+), 46 deletions(-) Cheers, Julien
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature