[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Bug#680674: transition: leptonlib

Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@gmail.com> (07/07/2012):
> This is a request to start a small transition for wheezy.  Please
> don't shoot me.


Alternative plan below. Other release team members may have different

> The current leptonlib packaging ships liblept.so.3 in a package with
> the same name (libleptonica) as the package shipping liblept.so.1 in
> squeeze.  That is problematic for a few reasons:
>  1. Upgrading libleptonica causes liblept.so.1 to be removed,
>     breaking leptonica-progs and tesseract-ocr from squeeze, but this
>     dependency is not declared.

Add Breaks: accordingly.

>  2. tesseract-ocr from wheezy requires liblept.so.3, but
>     libleptonica's shlibs file doesn't create an appropriate
>     dependency for that.  So a versioned dependency on libleptonica
>     was hardcoded in 3.02.01-4, which will only make for trouble in
>     future library transitions.

Optionally fix shlibs accordingly. If I read it right, we have the
following Depends:
  tesseract-ocr → libtesseract3 → libleptonica (>= 1.69~)

So the versioning against libleptonica is already there, and we wouldn't
gain anything in rebuilding src:tesseract after that. Correct?

>  3. There is no reason not to allow liblept.so.1 and liblept.so.3 to
>     be installed at the same time for a smoother upgrade, but using
>     the same package name prevents that (policy §8.1).

I think we can live with that for wheezy. Proper library versioning
can happen after that, which is going to need a fix for tesseract-ocr
at that time (killing the hardcoded Depends: on libleptonica).

[If you still have time to kill, please point involved maintainers to
the relevant bits of the Debian Policy for the next release cycle.]


Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: