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

Bug#579509: ctpl version 0.3.2 available at m.d.n

On Thursday 20,January,2011 02:05 AM, Jonathan Michalon wrote:
> Hi, dear ITP!
> Time to post an update: version 0.3.2 of ctpl is out and fixes an ugly bug
> (among other nice stuff).
> The package can be found on mentors.debian.net:
> - URL: http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/c/ctpl
> - Source repository: deb-src http://mentors.debian.net/debian unstable main
> - dget http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/c/ctpl/ctpl_0.3.2-1.dsc
> Have a nice release !

Hi Johnathan,

I can't sponsor your package (I've already uploaded 0.3.2 to Ubuntu though), but
I'd like to drop a few notes from what I've noticed while bringing ctpl up to
date in Ubuntu.

1. libctpl2.symbols should not be copied from libctpl1.symbols. This is because
libctpl1.symbols was for libctpl.so.1, but libctpl2.symbols is for libctpl.so.2.
If you have a symbol that's versioned 0.2, for example, then what could happen
is that you get a package that depends on libctpl2 (>= 0.2), but libctpl2 did
not exist prior to 0.3, when the SONAME bump took place.

2. Evgeni mentioned this to me sometime back, but I'm not sure if the message
reached you -- static libraries shouldn't be packaged at all, so please drop
/usr/lib/lib*.a from libctpl-dev.install

3. ctpl is only built if gio-2.0 >= 2.24 is found, and gio-2.0 is part of
libglib2.0-dev, so you'll need to bump the version for that in the build-dep to
2.24 rather than leaving it at 2.16.

4. Why are you build-dep'ing on libglib2.0-doc? I'm not sure whether this is
really needed.

5. Drop the libctpl2 depends from ctpl in debian/control. dh_shlibdeps will pick
it up on its own, with a more accurate dependency.

6. I'm not sure why libctpl-doc recommends libglib2.0-doc. Is that really necessary?

Apart from that, I think the package looks fine :-)

Kind regards,
Loong Jin

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Reply to: