Bug#676433: nmu: kmymoney_4.6.2-3
Hi Adam,
Am 06.06.2012 23:41, schrieb Adam D. Barratt:
> On Wed, 2012-06-06 at 23:10 +0200, Micha Lenk wrote:
>> there was a new upstream release that introduced a soname bump in libaqbanking.
>
> That makes this a(n uncoordinated) transition, not a binNMU request.
> Thankfully one that doesn't appear to clash with any other ongoing
> transitions that I can see.
Sorry, you're right. I did not anticipate that correctly. Please accept
my apologies.
>> For this reason all packages with build-deps on libaqbanking33-dev needs a
>> source-full upload in order to switch to libaqbanking34-dev and to pick up the
>> dependency on the new package libaqbanking34.
>
> Why do the -dev package names contain (and therefore change with) the
> SONAME? Given that they all Provide "libaqbanking-dev", could the -dev
> package not simply be a concrete package named libaqbanking-dev? That
> also makes transitions much easier and avoids the need for source
> uploads on each change (unless there are API changes which require the
> source changes).
The package had a rather unstable API change history. For that reason I
didn't dare to provide the real -dev package without the SONAME. But
recently the API seems to have settled a bit, so I will consider to
remove the SONAME from the package name at the next occasion (e.g. the
next SONAME bump).
>> The package kmymoney has a build-dep on 'libaqbanking33-dev |
>> libaqbanking-dev'. For this reason I hope that a binNMU is enough as a short
>> term solution to the problem.
>
> It's not even a short term solution, I'm afraid. The buildds will only
> consider the first branch of an alternative build-dependency, which
> means libaqbanking33-dev will always be installed.
Huh, I was afraid that might happen - now it really happened. If the
binNMU really isn't sufficient I will raise the severity of #676430
accordingly and do a NMU as needed.
What ever, sorry for the mess.
Regards,
Micha
Reply to: