Bug#956183: transition: libwmf
On 27/04/2020 08:12, Yangfl wrote:
> Emilio Pozuelo Monfort <pochu@debian.org> 于2020年4月25日周六 下午8:27写道：
>>
>> On 08/04/2020 07:02, Yangfl wrote:
>>> Package: release.debian.org
>>> Severity: normal
>>> User: release.debian.org@packages.debian.org
>>> Usertags: transition
>>>
>>> libwmf is released with package split, and old-style config script
>>> dropped with pkg-config file introduced. There are three packages
>>> needing patches against `libwmf-config':
>>>
>>> wv
>>> gimp
>>> abiword
>>>
>>> and two packages which should only require binNMU:
>>>
>>> graphicsmagick
>>> imagemagick
>>>
>>> I didn't do a test rebuild of these packages, because full rebuild
>>> would take too long time. The new version of libwmf should not have
>>> any API/ABI breakage, so I don't expect any ftbfs.
>>
>> It would be good to disentangle the package split (which due to the Breaks will
>> mean we need a lockstep transition with all or most packages migrating at the
>> same time) from the libwmf-config removal. If you reintroduce the script and the
>> rdeps build against the new libwmf version, then we can go ahead with this, and
>> libwmf-config could be removed after the transition. Otherwise we'll need to
>> wait until those packages are fixed.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Emilio
>
> https://salsa.debian.org/yangfl-guest/libwmf/-/commit/a542eed89c98bde74d410f6ea07ab7a3be77ebab
>
> Readded libwmf-config into /usr/bin. If that's ok we can upload it to
> unstable, and the transition should only require binNMU.
I'd like to know if the rdeps build against the new library version before we
start this. It's only a few packages and they don't take that long to build from
what I can see. There are scripts to help with this rdep testing. This is
specially important in this transition because you split the library package and
the new ones conflict against the old one due to the file conflicts.
Emilio
Reply to: