On Wed, Nov 30, 2005 at 08:08:15PM +0100, Stephan Hermann wrote: > Well, I will try to revert the change, no problem. But even for > libatlas-cpp-0.6 there was a soname change (if you see this bugreport about > the rename of libatlas-cpp-0.5) and there was no need to rename > libatlas-cpp-0.6 because the soname change was introduced by a new upstream > source. > > When I got the merge report into my hands for libatlas-cpp-0.6, there was no > renaming in rev 1, so I had to add c2a as soname change. I just saw too late, > that there was a rev 2 of this package, and in this rev a renaming was made. > > At the time of the merge, I was right. There is now a difference between > ubuntu and debian. I'm sorry for that, but I don't change it right now. If > there is a new upstream of atlas-cpp, we can try to bring the two packages > again in sync.
Sorry for the trouble I made. My fault to not correctly reread the transition mail again before doing the actual transition of atlas-cpp. It's clearly my bug. What shall I do now? Rename the binary packages again? Wait for a new upstream version (0.6.0) which changes the SONAME again? 0.6.0rc2 is already out. Cheers, Michael -- Escape the Java Trap with GNU Classpath! http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/java-trap.html Join the community at http://planet.classpath.org/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
