Hi, as you might know, the tetex-bin source package for experimental is awaiting NEW processing because it contains new binary packages, libkpathsea4 and libkpathsea4-dev (previously: libkpathsea3 and libkpathsea-dev). In a mail to Anthony Towns, after a conversation on -devel, I agreed with him that the development package should not have its name changed, and asked him to reject the new packages. I have changed my mind, and would be oblidged if you would let the packages in. The reason is as follows: Currently there is no documentation for libkpathsea but the source itself, and there is also no other document that would list the changes that caused the increase the soname. libkpathsea in its current state was never designed to be a dynamic shared library, and in a recent message upstream discouraged using it as such[1]. However, for people that previously did use it as a dynamic library without problems[2], he said that they should keep on building it until he is ready with a re-write that would yield a real, well-designed library with a documented API. Under these circumstances, I think it is better to force the maintainers of programs that use it into having a closer look. Otherwise, there may be changes that break things, perhaps only at runtime which might be undetected for long. Therefore, I'd rather change the name. I expect that the next teTeX release after the upcoming 3.0 will come with the new library with a new name (libkpse). Thanks in advance, Frank [1] It seems he has become aware of the peculiarities of library generation only recently [2] and there weren't any substantial bug reports in the last years -- Frank Küster Inst. f. Biochemie der Univ. Zürich Debian Developer
Attachment:
pgpY881xAEGGa.pgp
Description: PGP signature