On 2013-05-14 "Adam D. Barratt" <[email protected]> wrote: > On Mon, 2013-05-06 at 17:18 +0000, Andreas Metzler wrote: > > gnutls26 (2.12.23-2) experimental; urgency=low > > . > > * Build against libtasn1-6.
> [and subsequently to unstable] > Is there a plan for transitioning to the new library for other reverse > dependencies? Yes, definitely. libtasn1-3-dev should be gone asap. > Right now packages such as empathy are unbuildable: > empathy (= 3.4.2.3-3) build-depends on one of: > - libgnutls-dev (= 2.12.23-3) > empathy (= 3.4.2.3-3) build-depends on one of: > - libgcr-3-dev (= 3.4.1-3) > libgnutls-dev (= 2.12.23-3) depends on one of: > - libtasn1-6-dev (= 3.3-1) > libgcr-3-dev (= 3.4.1-3) depends on one of: > - libtasn1-3-dev (= 2.13-2) > libtasn1-6-dev (= 3.3-1) and libtasn1-3-dev (= 2.13-2) conflict I was not aware this would cause a (mini-)transition, otherwise I might have waited. If necessary I could upgrade libtasn1-3 to 2.14 and *temporarily* switch back gnutls to the older version. The transition is not a big one, libtasn1-3-dev has only three reverse dependencies including gnutls26. However one of these (gcr) currently FTBFS (Bug report submitted). > If the libraries aren't intended to be co-installable, why are they in > separate source packages? The library packages are co-installable, the development packages can't be, due to libtasn1.so. cu Andreas -- `What a good friend you are to him, Dr. Maturin. His other friends are so grateful to you.' `I sew his ears on from time to time, sure' -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected] Archive: http://lists.debian.org/[email protected]
