Bug#791332: transition: spatialindex (GCC 5)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA512
On 04-08-15 22:02, Jonathan Wiltshire wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 03, 2015 at 12:47:59PM +0200, Sebastiaan Couwenberg
> wrote:
>> On 03-08-15 12:41, Sebastiaan Couwenberg wrote:
>>> On 21-07-15 01:00, Sebastiaan Couwenberg wrote:
>>>> On 07/03/2015 03:14 PM, Matthias Klose wrote:
>>>>> - If a library transition is needed, please prepare for the
>>>>> change. Rename the library package, append "v5" to the name
>>>>> of the package (e.g. libfoo2 -> libfoo2v5). Such a change
>>>>> can be avoided, if you have a soversion bump and you upload
>>>>> this version instead of the renamed package. Prepare a
>>>>> patch and attach it to this issue (mark this issue with
>>>>> patch), so that it is possible to NMU such a package. We'll
>>>>> probably have more than hundred transitions triggered. Then
>>>>> reassign the issue to release.debian.org and properly tag
>>>>> it as a transition issue, by sending an email to
>>>>> control@bugs.debian.org:
>>>>
>>>> Like geos (#791045) and basically all other library
>>>> transitions [1] for the Debian GIS team, I'll be conservative
>>>> and assume that transition is required.
>>>
>>> spatialindex (1.8.5-2~exp2) available in experimental is ready
>>> for the GCC 5 transition. It includes the library package
>>> rename, and symbols file update with GCC 5 on all
>>> architectures.
>>>
>>> Its only reverse dependency is qgis, and that should still
>>> work.
>>
>> The attached debdiff can be used to NMU.
>
> Please go ahead to unstable.
Thanks. spatialindex (1.8.5-2) was just uploaded to unstable.
Kind Regards,
Bas
- --
GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146 50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2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=egvH
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Reply to: