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

Re: question regarding unblock request for library



On Fri, Jan 23, 2015 at 00:56:24 +0100, IOhannes m zmölnig wrote:

> dear release team,
> 
> sorry for this untimely interrupt, i figure you are busy working on
> getting jessie out.
> 
> 
> summary: a *library* package (libassimp3) has been reported to have some
> symbols dropped. this makes the library unusable in certain cases.
> does this qualify for a unblock request?
> 
> 
> longer explanation:
> the dropped symbols are only with resp. to the accompanying header
> files, not to older package versions. (so its not a soname-bump problem,
> but a mismatch between headers and library).
> the original reporter[1] was kind enough to report this with severity
> "important" (thus not affecting the freeze), but i am wondering if the
> severity should be escalated to "serious", due to the nature of libraries.
> luckily, i am not aware of any packages that depend on this library
> outside its source package, so the bug seems to not affect other
> packages (their FTBFS would have flagged the underlying problem earlier).
> otoh, the bug is still a bummer for anybody who wants to develop against
> this library (like the bug reporter)
> 
> the fix is quite minimal, as it adds 1 (one) line to the version-script
> used for tightening the exports, and 7 (seven) lines to the symbols-file
> for the newly exported symbols.
> 
> 
> if you could drop me a note whether i should keep pestering you with my
> little problem or not, i would be thankful.
> 
If this doesn't affect any other package I don't think it's suitable,
sorry.  Next time please do attach a diff, it's much easier to
understand what this is about when seeing a patch than with just an
abstract explanation.

Cheers,
Julien

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature


Reply to: