On 2021-06-09 12:41:29 +0200, Sebastiaan Couwenberg wrote: > On 6/9/21 12:11 PM, Andreas Beckmann wrote: > > On 08/06/2021 11.56, Andreas Beckmann wrote: > >> gdal can rename gdal-data to gdal3-data, build with > >> --datadir=/sur/share/gdal3 and drop the Breaks on libgdal20. > >> Thus libgdal20 + gdal-data from buster should be co-installable with > >> libgdal28 + gdal3-data from bullseye and survive the upgrade if needed. > >> > >> A patch doing this is attached, I'm now testing the upgrade paths > >> (along the introduction of the libhdf5*-103 metapackages). > > > > If the gdal-data issue is solved, the next problem shows up: > > > > libgdal20 Depends: libogdi3.2 > > libgdal28 Depends: libogdi4.1 > > > > but the two ogdi library packages are not co-installable (both ship > > plugins in the same unversioned path). > > > > So even if we fix hdf5, libgdal20 is unlikely to be able to survive > > upgrades from buster. (Sime something that was built against libgdal20 > > in buster now likely depends on libgdal28 in bullseye) > > But I'd still like to add a Breaks: libgdal20 to libgdal28 to make this > > explicit, since transitive Breaks don't work well. > > I'm only willing to update gdal in unstable if the 3.2.2+dfsg-1 changes > don't need to be reverted. Since that goes against the freeze policy, > that's highly unlikely as the RMs seem unwilling to make exceptions.
Is 3.2.2 a bugfix only release? Are there any changes in 3.2.2 that go beyond targetted fixes? Is there a policy that gdal upstream follows for picking patches for a bug fix release? Cheers > > Kind Regards, > > Bas > > -- > GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1 > Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146 50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1 > -- Sebastian Ramacher
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
