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

[Pkg-xfce-devel] XFCE 4.12 backport for Jessie


Why not? Current e.g. xfce4-mixer source version IS the same in both jessie
and stretch (https://tracker.debian.org/pkg/xfce4-mixer). The real problem
here is that several XFCE components in jessie (whose source version has
not changed in stretch yet) conflict with xfce4-panel 4.12, so they were
binNMU'ed in stretch. In order to get e.g. xfce4-panel properly backported
in jessie, I need to rebuild them against backported libs (with my proposed
suffix "+b1~bpo8+1").

Anyway, I'm trying another approach: a minimal backport with only xfwm4 and
its dependencies. I'll try to install them in jessie and see if it fits my

2015-08-21 15:57 GMT-03:00 Alexander Wirt <formorer at formorer.de>:

> On Fri, 21 Aug 2015, La?rcio de Sousa wrote:
> > Vincent and all,
> >
> > About suffix "~bpo8+1+b1" you've mentioned, it would still not work in my
> > case, because resulting package version would be lower than one in
> Jessie!
> > Let me take a practical example:
> >
> > Package xfce4-mixer:
> >   * Current source version: 1.10.3-1 in both Jessie and Stretch
> >   * Current binary version in jessie: 1.10.3-1 (with xfce4-panel 4.10
> > dependency)
> >   * Current binary version in stretch: 1.10.3-1+b1 (with xfce4-panel 4.12
> > dependency)
> >   * Hypothetical binary version in jessie-backports:
> 1.10.3-1[X]~bpo8+1[Y]
> > (with backported xfce4-panel 4.12 dependency)
> Ehm. STOP. you don't package versions with the same source (!) version in
> jessie and stretch. If you are doing that, you are doing something really
> wrong.
> Alex - Backports ftpmaster

*La?rcio de Sousa*
*Orientador de Inform?tica*
*Escola Municipal "Professor Eul?lio Gruppi"*
*Rua Ismael da Silva Mello, 559, Mogi Moderno*
*Mogi das Cruzes - SPCEP 08717-390*
Telefone: (11) 4726-8313
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-xfce-devel/attachments/20150821/0ba346bb/attachment.html>

Reply to: