Bug#461583: ITP: libdc1394-22

[Kurt Roeckx <kurt@roeckx.be>]

On Sun, Jan 20, 2008 at 11:15:09PM +0100, Guus Sliepen wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 20, 2008 at 11:18:14PM +0200, Peter Antoniac wrote:
> 
> > > - Missing and incorrect Conflicts: entries in the control file for Debian.
> > 
> > If you mean the Conflicts with 11 and 13, we don't want those two packages to 
> > conflict. The SO 22 can work with 13 or 11 without problems...
> 
> I also added Conflicts with 20, because some people might have installed
> that one from experimental, and the -utils package has to Conflict with
> the old -examples package.

I'm guessing that there is a minor misunderstanding here.  The conflicts
are only for the -dev packages.  The library packages themself don't
conflict.

But I have to wonder a few things:
- Why do you need 2 source packages for libdc1394?  Do you think
  migrating from the current "13" to "22" will take a long time?  Did
  things change alot in the API?  We only seem to have 10 packages
  in unstable that build depend on libdc1394 so I don't see why we
  need 2 source packages for that.
- Why do you want to embed the current soname in things like the -dev
  and -doc packages?  (It might be related to the first question.)
- Is there really a need to have 2 "utils" binary packages?  They
  even conflict with each other, and the "22" doesn't seem to make
  any sense in this case.


Kurt