Josselin Mouette <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Le jeudi 29 septembre 2005 à 19:18 +0200, Frank Küster a écrit :
>> Josselin Mouette <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> > Please don't do that. A library transition breaks packages in unstable
>> > for a while, but if we have both versions, we're going
Le jeudi 29 septembre 2005 à 19:18 +0200, Frank Küster a écrit :
> Josselin Mouette <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Please don't do that. A library transition breaks packages in unstable
> > for a while, but if we have both versions, we're going to have to deal
> > with them for several *years*.
Josselin Mouette <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Please don't do that. A library transition breaks packages in unstable
> for a while, but if we have both versions, we're going to have to deal
> with them for several *years*. That's what happened for libpng, and
> believe me, it's a nightmare.
Why d
* Frank Küster ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [050929 10:07]:
> Henrique de Moraes Holschuh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > On Wed, 28 Sep 2005, Frank Küster wrote:
> >> If my second interpretation is right, we depend on maintainers' action
> >> for that. In order to make all dependencies on the old versio
Henrique de Moraes Holschuh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, 28 Sep 2005, Frank Küster wrote:
>> If my second interpretation is right, we depend on maintainers' action
>> for that. In order to make all dependencies on the old version
>> disappear, would a "still depends on libkpathsea3" bug b
Frank Kuester wrote:
> As far as I can see, in this case all other packages would continue
> using libkpathsea-dev (corresponding to libkpathsea3) for building, and
> continue to depend on libkpathsea3, which in turn would continue to be
> available. Only the tetex-bin deb itself would depend on l
On Wed, 28 Sep 2005, Frank Küster wrote:
> If my second interpretation is right, we depend on maintainers' action
> for that. In order to make all dependencies on the old version
> disappear, would a "still depends on libkpathsea3" bug be RC?
Yes, fixable with a quick-and-dirty NMU that only does
Andreas Barth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> That would work for the library issue, and would "only" makes some
> packages FTBFS because tetex changed (but I can think we can live with
> that). Even better, if you do it right, you can change the
> libkpathsea-dev to libkpathsea4-dev if TeTeX-3.0 has
On Wed, Sep 28, 2005 at 02:53:59PM +0200, Frank Küster wrote:
> Wouldn't it be possible to do the following: teTeX-3.0 is uploaded to
> unstable, including the libkpathsea4 and libkpathsea4-dev packages (it
> uses the library itself), but at the same time libkpathsea3 and
> libkpathsea-dev are stil
* Frank Küster ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [050928 14:54]:
> Wouldn't it be possible to do the following: teTeX-3.0 is uploaded to
> unstable, including the libkpathsea4 and libkpathsea4-dev packages (it
> uses the library itself), but at the same time libkpathsea3 and
> libkpathsea-dev are still available
Le mercredi 28 septembre 2005 à 14:53 +0200, Frank Küster a écrit :
> Wouldn't it be possible to do the following: teTeX-3.0 is uploaded to
> unstable, including the libkpathsea4 and libkpathsea4-dev packages (it
> uses the library itself), but at the same time libkpathsea3 and
> libkpathsea-dev ar
Hi,
teTeX-3.0 has been sitting in experimental for a while; we have not
uploaded it to unstable because it involves a library soname bump, and
the release team has requested not to upload new library versions.
However, there's much more to this new upstream release, also much more
that requires t
12 matches
Mail list logo
