Re: RFS: ruby-ncursesw 1.3.1-1
On Sun, Apr 15, 2012 at 1:24 PM, Antonio Terceiro <terceiro@debian.org> wrote:
> Per Andersson escreveu isso aí:
>> Hi!
>>
>> After asking Gaudenz about sponsoring ruby-ncursesw (and sup-mail) I was
>> pointed at #477366 and asked if a separate source package really was
>> necessary (perl ncurses apparently links against ncursesw).
>>
>> So I made a few attempts to having ruby-ncursesw also build ruby-ncurses,
>> upstream is same but source is slightly different.
>>
>> In the end I figured that it is probably enough to symlink
>>
>> lib/ncurses.rb -> lib/ncursesw.rb
>>
>> and let ruby-ncursesw Provides: ruby-ncurses.
>>
>> This would make both Ruby's ncurses and ncursesw use ncursesw\_bin,
>> which is linked against ncursesw, so both would have wide character support.
>>
>> Is this a sufficient solution? If so merger with ruby-ncurses (mostly,
>> transition packages) could be performed and then ruby-ncurses source
>> package could be removed.
>
> If ruby-ncursesw supports everything that ruby-ncurses supports, than I
> think we should go fo it. Since ruby-ncurses has few reverse
> dependencies, it should be ok. Could you please also test tpp (the other
> rdep besides sup-mail) with ruby-ncursesw?
I'll have a look at that.
> The only comment I have regarding the packaging is that you don't need multiple
> entries in debian/changelog package was not uploaded yet. You can condense
> everything as a single entry for version 1.3.1-1, and you don't need to list
> the changes between these non-uploaded versions, since users of the package
> don't care about that.
Ok, sure. I have created the tag 1.3.1-1 already (even though the
package was not
uploaded) because I did not know better. Is that a problem?
Should ruby-ncursesw also take over all the transitional packages from
ruby-ncurses?
Best,
Per
> --
> Antonio Terceiro <terceiro@debian.org>
Reply to: