Hi, I am still waiting for responds on the below.
~Niels On 2012-11-22 13:45, Niels Thykier wrote: > Package: release.debian.org > Severity: normal > User: release.debian....@packages.debian.org > Usertags: tpu > > Hi, > > A user reported an issue with libitext-java in testing (#687692). In > short, the problem was an ABI issue in bouncycastle. > > The diff between bouncycastle/1.44 and bouncycastle/1.46 is far to > large to sanely review and libitext-java is the only package which has > any (reported) issues caused by the ABI change. > Therefore, simply rebuilding libitext-java in testing (with an upper > bound on its dependency) should suffice for this particular problem. > > > Unfortunately, it turns out that libitext-java declares no > dependnecies relations (except libitext-java-gcj) in testing at all, > which is obvously wrong. > In sid, I have taken the liberty of properly fixing this by using > javahelper to compute the proper dependency relations automatically > (as that version cannot migrate to testing anyway being built against > the bouncycastle in sid). > > The question is then, should I backport the changes for > auto-generating the dependencies and insert the upper bound on the > bouncycastle dependency -OR- should I simply manually hardcode all the > missing dependencies in the tpu upload? > > > I have attached the debdiff between libitext-java in sid and testing > to give you an idea of the changes involved. In case you are > wondering about the explicit version'ed dependencies in the diff, it > is because the tools involved are not able to properly give version > bounds on the dependencies[0]. > > ~Niels > > [0] Sadly, Java packages do not have a shlibs/symbols system (nor the > "rename package on ABI breakage"-proceedure). -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/50d1ab9d.3040...@thykier.net
