Re: debian: blands: mathematics-dev: libmpfi libtestu01: git-format-patch
Hi:
On 21/05/15 21:19, Andreas Tille wrote:
> On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 08:20:57PM +0200, Jerome BENOIT wrote:
>>
>> Meanwhile, I have noticed an oddity concerning libnauty-dev :
>> the related information at
>>
>> http://blends.debian.org/science/tasks/mathematics-dev#libnauty-dev
>>
>> are clearly obsolete.
>
> Well, not that clearly since it is found in squeeze and wheezy (but you
> are right - I should kick at least squeeze from the list of parsed
> releases ... I actually assumed I would have done this).
>
>> I guess that it is related at some point that
>> libnauty-dev is no more a real package but a provided one:
>>
>> http://sources.debian.net/src/nauty/2.5r9%2Bds-1/debian/control/ [line 60]
>>
>> Do I miss something ?
>
> I just pushed
>
> $ git diff HEAD^
> diff --git a/tasks/mathematics-dev b/tasks/mathematics-dev
> index 328f577..1d25936 100644
> --- a/tasks/mathematics-dev
> +++ b/tasks/mathematics-dev
> @@ -54,7 +54,7 @@ Depends: libarmadillo-dev
>
> Suggests: libitpp-dev
>
> -Suggests: libnauty-dev
> +Depends: libnauty2-dev
>
> Suggests: libtestu01-dev
>
>
> Please note that I also replaced Sugests by Depends. While this has no
> effect since non-free packages will be "degraded" automatically it makes
> a difference once the package might be released under a free license.
ok.
>
> The essence of this issue is: Package maintainers should either maintain
> the Blends tasks files when creating new packages (and libnauty2-dev is
> per definition a new package since there is a new name string) or at
> least drop me a note.
On the other hand, libnauty2-dev Provides libnauty-dev, which may be also provided by
libnauty3-dev and so forth: my guess is that it would be more appropriate that the
latest concrete package that Provides a virtual package.
Otherwise, it appears that libtestu01-dev, also a virtual package, is not yet present
in the mathematics-dev task page after a couple of updates.
Thanks,
Jerome
>
> Thanks for noticing
>
> Andreas.
>
Reply to: