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

Bug#990174: unblock: gdal/3.2.2+dfsg-2



Package: release.debian.org
Severity: normal
User: release.debian.org@packages.debian.org
Usertags: unblock

Please unblock package gdal per the discussion in #989597.

[ Reason ]
It fixes #986975 and the postgis & libmrpt-dev upgrade issues.

[ Impact ]
Issue during distribution upgrade.

[ Tests ]
Upgrade of postgis and libmrpt-dev have been tested in a chroot, see:

 https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=989597#184
 https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=989597#189

[ Risks ]
Low, while gdal is a key package, if the version hadn't been used in the
UbuntuGIS PPA the Breaks would never have been added.

[ Checklist ]
  [x] all changes are documented in the d/changelog
  [x] I reviewed all changes and I approve them
  [x] attach debdiff against the package in testing

[ Other info ]
#989597 can be closed as well.

unblock gdal/3.2.2+dfsg-2

Kind Regards,

Bas
diff -Nru gdal-3.2.2+dfsg/debian/changelog gdal-3.2.2+dfsg/debian/changelog
--- gdal-3.2.2+dfsg/debian/changelog	2021-03-10 15:12:55.000000000 +0100
+++ gdal-3.2.2+dfsg/debian/changelog	2021-06-21 21:06:09.000000000 +0200
@@ -1,3 +1,10 @@
+gdal (3.2.2+dfsg-2) unstable; urgency=medium
+
+  * Drop Breaks from gdal-data to make libgdal20 & libgdal28 co-installable.
+    (closes: #986975)
+
+ -- Bas Couwenberg <sebastic@debian.org>  Mon, 21 Jun 2021 21:06:09 +0200
+
 gdal (3.2.2+dfsg-1) unstable; urgency=medium
 
   * New upstream release.
diff -Nru gdal-3.2.2+dfsg/debian/control gdal-3.2.2+dfsg/debian/control
--- gdal-3.2.2+dfsg/debian/control	2021-03-10 15:06:40.000000000 +0100
+++ gdal-3.2.2+dfsg/debian/control	2021-06-21 21:05:55.000000000 +0200
@@ -193,7 +193,6 @@
 Architecture: all
 Multi-Arch: foreign
 Depends: ${misc:Depends}
-Breaks: libgdal20 (<< 2.5.0~)
 Description: Geospatial Data Abstraction Library - Data files
  GDAL is a translator library for raster geospatial data formats.
  As a library, it presents a single abstract data model to the

Reply to: