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

Bug#815153: marked as done (transition: libvigraimpex)

Your message dated Fri, 18 Mar 2016 12:01:58 +0100
with message-id <56EBE026.4080602@debian.org>
and subject line Re: Bug#815153: transition: libvigraimpex
has caused the Debian Bug report #815153,
regarding transition: libvigraimpex
to be marked as done.

This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.

(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact owner@bugs.debian.org
immediately.)


-- 
815153: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=815153
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact owner@bugs.debian.org with problems
--- Begin Message --- 
Package: release.debian.org
Severity: normal
User: release.debian.org@packages.debian.org
Usertags: transition

Hello,

I want to register a transition of libvigraimpex[1] because there are changes
in the ABI.

The new version of the package has been uploaded to experimental now,
it's 1.10.0+git20160211.167be93-1. The new binary package of the shared library
is libvigraimpex6, and there's an SONAME bump involved)[2].

But the ABI changes are related to the package in testing (1.10.0+dfsg-11). The
package currently in unstable (1.10.0+git20160120.803d5d4-1) isn't optimal, I've
missed the ABI changes (additions but not the changes are mentioned in the
changelog) and the SONAME bump[3], that doesn't happen again.

Unfortunately the old version couldn't be reuploaded nor backported for unstable
because there was a FTBFS with updated Numpy[3], maybe you have a suggestion what
could be done here.

There are no further ABI diffs between 1.10.0+git20160120.803d5d4-1 (unstable)
and 1.10.0+git20160211.167be93-1 (the packaging of branch 1-11-rc in experimental),
and we've already test build the reverse dependencies (please see [4] on that).

However, libvigraimpex currently doesn't build on all official supported archs,
I'm on this to get solved and upload one more package in experimental soon.

Thank you,
Daniel Stender

Ben file:

title = "libvigraimpex";
is_affected = .build_depends ~ "libvigraimpex-dev";
is_good = .depends ~ "libvigraimpex6";
is_bad = .depends ~ "libvigraimpex5v5";

[1]: https://packages.qa.debian.org/libv/libvigraimpex.html

[2]: http://www.danielstender.com/uploads/compat_report.html

[3]: https://bugs.debian.org/811370 (libvigraimpex: FTBFS in sid: test suite failure due to pynum 1.10)

[4]: https://bugs.debian.org/813415 (libvigraimpex5v5: soname bump without package name change)

-- System Information:
Debian Release: stretch/sid
  APT prefers testing
  APT policy: (500, 'testing')
Architecture: amd64 (x86_64)

Kernel: Linux 4.3.0-1-amd64 (SMP w/4 CPU cores)
Locale: LANG=de_DE.utf8, LC_CTYPE=de_DE.utf8 (charmap=UTF-8)
Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/dash
Init: systemd (via /run/systemd/system)

--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message --- 
On 24/02/16 20:13, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote:

Now, the transition is started but your package still fails to build on a few
release architectures. That needs fixing.


This transition just finished.

Cheers,
Emilio

--- End Message ---
Reply to: