Bug#901015: transition: protobuf

[Emilio Pozuelo Monfort <pochu@debian.org>]

Control: tags -1 confirmed

On 11/09/2018 09:51, László Böszörményi (GCS) wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 11, 2018 at 8:41 AM Pirate Praveen <praveen@onenetbeyond.org> wrote:
>> On Fri, 17 Aug 2018 10:21:41 +0200
>> =?UTF-8?B?TMOhc3psw7MgQsO2c3rDtnJtw6lueWkgKEdDUyk=?= <gcs@debian.org> wrote:
>>> The new protobuf -> protobuf-c / grpc chain compiles now on all
>>> release architectures. Due to the mentioned protobuf soname change, I
>>> have to restart building of all other dependent packages. I'll be off
>>> the grid for the weekend, but will do it next week.
>>
>> Any update on this?
>  Indeed, missed to post the results. I'm not at home, all I write is
> from my head only. I've build tested all the protobuf reverse
> dependencies.
> About two packages fail for other reasons and those are already
> reported as an RC bug. Four packages fail due to protobuf changes and
> three of those already reported by you and have an upstream patch.
> I've tested those and their build now works.
> The last package which fails is gazebo which seems to be team
> maintained but it has two NMUs already. There's no bug reported here
> for the protobuf update but upstream aware of it and has a patch[1].
> This one is not yet tested by me, but the upstream BTS contains a
> comment that's a working fix for gazebo 7.x and the original bug
> report[2] states that the fix is in place for the 8.x and 9.x versions
> as well. If you have time, please file a bug for this to the gazeboo
> source package - but as noted its Debian maintainers are not very
> active.

Sounds good. Please go ahead with the transition and bump the bugs to serious.

Cheers,
Emilio